og 198 怎么没人讨论B？

198. Although Napoleon's army entered Russia with far more supplies than they had in their previous
campaigns, it had provisions for only twenty-four days.
(A) they had in their previous campaigns
(B) their previous campaigns had had
(C) they had for any previous campaign
(D) in their previous campaigns
(E) for any previous campaign

Answer to Question 198
If than is followed by a clause referring to army, the subject of that clause must be singular (it). Furthermore, the
verb of that clause will need to be in the past perfect form (had had) because it refers to a time before the
simple past of entered. Finally, the preposition/or is more precise than in because supplies are gathered/or an
upcoming campaign. Choices A and C incorrectly use the plural they and the simple past had. Moreover, A uses
the less precise in. Choices D and E wisely dispense with the full clause and use a simple prepositional phrase.
D, however, uses the imprecise in and the plural their. Only E, the best choice, avoids all the errors mentioned
above.

首先我觉得是答案B, 理由如下：

1，OG的解释说了ACDE，就是没说B为什么错。所以我怀疑only E，是打印错误，应该是only B, the best answer. OG中一般都是把所有错误选项都说一遍哪错了，有时解释一下正确答案，有时就不解释正确答案了。但从来没不解释错误选项的时候。

2。more...than 比较。记得是比较主语和谓语都相同时才可以省略主谓语，而直接摆出不同的介词短语，即比较的是状语的不同。

而综合以前各位的讨论：究竟than后面应该补出什么内容呢？有两种补同意见：

... more supplies than it had had for any previous campaign, it had...

...more supplies than it had entered Russian with supplies for any previous campaign...

这两句主谓都与more...than前面的Napoleon's army entered Russian with supplies不一致。

若一致，应该是...more ... than Napoleon's army entered Russian with supplies, it had...但此情况下时态又不对。

综上所述，我认为B 正确。比较主语不一致同时补出主语和谓语。即：

Although Napoleon's army entered Russian with far more supplies than their previous campaigns had had, it had provisions for only 24days.

本人愚见。请大牛，小牛们指正。

这题折射出这样一个思想：宁可不完备，也不要犯错误。

上来一看，more---than---；很清晰的，考点在“比较”上。

这道题目的正确选项（E），按照比较三原则，肯定是不完备的（何为不完备？前后比较的形式不对称，有些部分没有补出来）；但是其他的几个选项却绝对是错误的。

看ABC中补出的谓语had（或者had had，暂且不看它的时态），这是最大的问题。

题目中比较的是什么是entered Russia，还是with far more supplies？大家都知道，是后者。

但是后者没有用动词，而用with来表示“有，带有”的意思；选ABC的朋友补出had（实意动词）来实现“比较三原则”，但其实对应了前面唯一的动词entered；

那么这里可以补出谓语动词吗？我想不行，即便补出助动词did也是不行的，还是对应去了entered

再看DE，D中their指代不对；再考虑到，E supplies for的习惯用语，肯定比D的in好。

当MM回来看贴时，恍然已经两个多月过去了。

还是请教NN进来看看吧，以上是自己的想法。