ChaseDream

标题: OG13 SC7 求教NN解答一下it代词指代的问题！！！ [打印本页]

作者: Hugateddybear 时间: 2013-4-11 17:09
标题: OG13 SC7 求教NN解答一下it代词指代的问题！！！
7. The intricate structure of the compound insect eye, having hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, help explain why scientists have assumed that it evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

(A) having hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, help explain why scientists have assumed that it

(B) having hundreds of miniature eyes that are called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that they

(C) with its hundreds of miniature eyes that are called ommatidia, helps explain scientists’ assuming that they

(D) with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, help explain scientists’ assuming that it

(E) with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that it
其实答案已经明白了，但是有一个小问题，在E中的it,指代为什么会没有歧义呢，难道不会有指代structure和eyes的歧义吗？
拜托大家啦谢谢: )

作者: vividlai 时间: 2013-4-11 19:02
在这里it不作为split的点，代词指代不清晰不是首要考虑的问题
如果一道题里面， 5个选项都用了这个代词那么视为指代无歧义，如果有选项换了别的词，比如用一个抽象名词概括了，那么就要考虑指代不清晰

作者: rylstar01 时间: 2013-4-11 19:08

I'm not sure where you heard the idea that "pronouns can not refer to objects of preposition" --- that's just false. 100% false. Consider ----

The framers of the US Constitution did not anticipate the challenges it would face in a post-industrial world.

The novels of James Joyce reflect his fascination with both word origins and patterns of verbal association.

Those are two perfectly correct sentences, GMAT SC worthy in every way, in which the pronoun (in bold) clearly refers to an antecedent in a prepositional phrase. And, of course, it happens in OG 13 #7, so the GMAT has absolutely no problem with this grammatical structure.

A related problem --- some pundits say that a pronoun's antecedent can't be in the possessive --- for example,
"James Joyce's novels reflect his fascination ..."
The GMAT seems to reject this structure consistently, so I would say it's safe to call this wrong.

这是一个instructor的帖子，资料来自http://www.beatthegmat.com/og13-7-t114060.html

作者: Hugateddybear 时间: 2013-4-11 19:24

vividlai 发表于 2013-4-11 19:02
在这里it不作为split的点，代词指代不清晰不是首要考虑的问题
如果一道题里面， 5个选项都用了这个代词那么 ...

谢谢VIVI 你的头像超美噢~ 嘿嘿

作者: Hugateddybear 时间: 2013-4-11 19:25

rylstar01 发表于 2013-4-11 19:08
I'm not sure where you heard the idea that "pronouns can not refer to objects of preposition" --- t ...

谢谢star 我明白你说的啦！你总来回我的帖子~ 哈哈 : p

作者: rylstar01 时间: 2013-4-11 19:39

Hugateddybear 发表于 2013-4-11 19:25
谢谢star 我明白你说的啦！你总来回我的帖子~ 哈哈 : p

太客气了，也有助于帮我查漏补缺，应该是我谢谢你啦。

加油。

作者: rylstar01 时间: 2013-4-11 19:43
其实这种“A of B”结构的遇上了代词，“COMMA+which”，有时候有理，有时候又觉得会歧义，不过更多时候通过Better来选择吧，毕竟还有其他硬伤呢。也许这就是GMAT培养商科的思路，不会给你最好的（不排除有最好的），但是让你选择更好的。用到生活同样适用呢，做抉择的时候永远是在比较利弊。
扯远了。从SC，扯到生活了。

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)