Prep2012-Pack1-SC-073 VSC004703 hard
Although improved efficiency in converting harvested trees into wood products may reduce harvest rates, it will stimulate demand by increasing supply and lowering prices, thereby boosting consumption.
A. in converting harvested trees into wood products may reduce harvest rates, it will stimulate demand by increasing supply and lowering prices, thereby boosting
B. in converting harvested trees into wood products may reduce harvest rates, demand will be stimulated because of increasing supply and lowering prices, which boost
C. of converting harvested trees into wood products may reduce harvest rates, it stimulate demand by increasing supply and lowering prices, which boosts
D. of harvested trees being converted into wood products may reduce harvest rates, it will stimulate demand, because it will increase supply and lower prices, thereby boosting
E. when harvested trees are converted into wood products may reduce harvest rates, demand will be stimulated because of increasing supply and lowering prices, which boost
语法知识可以很快帮你排除掉CDE
A B 可以说语法上都是没什么问题的 差别就在语义
A Although efficiency reduce harvest rates, it (the efficiency) will stimulate demand by increasing supply, thereby boosting consumption
这句话逻辑非常清楚地围绕 efficiency 展开：efficiency虽然有坏的一面，但是好的一面在于它通过增加supply, 来刺激了需求，从而增加消费
非常精确地阐明了因果关系：efficiency -->by increasing supply --> stimulate demand --> boost consumption
看看B Although efficiency reduce harvest rates, demand will be stimulated because of increasing supply, which boost consumptiom
Although 讲了efficiency 坏的一面之后，突然提出 demand会被stimulate (由于increasing supply), 进而用一个从句来修饰 increasing supply, 表示increasing supply 导致增长的consumption
注意到区别了吗？
1.在B里面，efficiency这个主题突然消失了，后面转折的内容都跟efficiency没关系，这使得句子的内容非常不清晰
2.demand被stimulate, 被什么东西stimulate? 这里非常重要的信息被隐藏，demand明明是被efficiency stimulate的，怎么可以让它做了无名英雄
3.用which 从句修饰那个increasing supply, 语法上说得通，efficiency 和 increasing supply 都可以来解释boosting consumption；但是，语义上说不通；这里要表达强烈的因果关系，需要用逗号+v-ing 来表示前面从句的直接结果，而不是用一个非限定定语从句来描述一个名词；两者在表达上有巨大差异
再来一题 OG 13 77
77. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
语法又帮助我们把选项narrow down 到 A 和 D
我和很多童鞋之前一样困惑
明明reduced 的是协议之前允许dump的量啊 A 怎么就不对了呢
要注意 the municipalities had been allowed to dump 是放在一个从句里修饰 1972 agreement reduced 的amount
也就是说 A 要 reduced的是历史里已经发生的东西 这个不符合逻辑 是因为
你没办法回到过去(也就是1972 areement之前），去改变历史里 the municipalities 被允许丢弃的量。
对于中文来说 是听不出区别的 因为翻译过来都是“减少1972之前那个被允许的量”
但是在英文里 这两个意思有巨大的区别 因为你要减少的 是一个新的量 而不是在历史上涂涂改改
一个是 1972 agreement reduced the amount that had already been decided in the history = illogical, 涂改历史
一个是 1972 agreement reduced the amount that were allowed after the agreement = make sense, 1972的agreement 只能改变这个agreement发生之后的事情
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
zhichi