ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2384|回复: 9
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教GWD新题1的语法问题

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2008-2-20 16:18:00 | 只看该作者

请教GWD新题1的语法问题

先谢过了~~~

Q16:

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

 

  1. a greater proportion than it was
  2. a greater proportion than
  3. a greater proportion than they have been
  4. which is greater than was so
  5. which is greater than it has been

答案选的C, 我选的A 主要是不明白为什么than后面要用现在完成时

Q23:

Past assessments of the Brazilian rain forest have used satellite images to tally deforested areas, where farmers and ranchers have clear-cut and burned all the trees, but such work has not addressed either logging, which is the removal of only selected trees, as well as surface fires, burning down individual trees but do not denude the forest.

 

  1. which is the removal of only selected trees, as well as surface fires, burning
  2. which removes only selected trees, or surface fires that burn
  3. which removes only selected trees, along with surface fires that burn
  4. removing only selected trees, or surface fires, burning
  5. removing only selected trees, as well as surface fires that burn

答案选的B,我选的D 

我分析处这里是either or的搭配, 但是为什么是用which句型呢, 自己认为用两个doing应该更对称一些

请nn为我指条明路 感谢感谢

沙发
发表于 2008-2-20 18:08:00 | 只看该作者

Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.

  1. a greater proportion than it was
        
  2. a greater proportion than
        
  3. a greater proportion than they have been
        
  4. which is greater than was so
        
  5. which is greater than it has been

我觉得这题答案应该是B。AC都有错误,A的it不对,与soaring television costs不一致;C的have been不对,与accounted for不平行,而且时态不对,accounted for就已经是过去时态了,in any previous election就表示了动作应该在accounted for之前,所以应该是过去完成时,改成they had done才正确。DE不用说,也都有时态错误,都不是过去完成时。既然这些有动词的都不对,就只能选择省略了动词也避免了麻烦的B了。

Past assessments of the Brazilian rain forest have used satellite images to tally deforested areas, where farmers and ranchers have clear-cut and burned all the trees, but such work has not addressed either logging, which is the removal of only selected trees, as well as surface fires, burning down individual trees but do not denude the forest.

  1. which is the removal of only selected trees, as well as surface fires, burning
         
  2. which removes only selected trees, or surface fires that burn
         
  3. which removes only selected trees, along with surface fires that burn
         
  4. removing only selected trees, or surface fires, burning
         
  5. removing only selected trees, as well as surface fires that burn

这题应该是B,removing修饰logging不合逻辑,伐木业这种“行业”本身,它可以移动树木么?

B是用定语从句来修饰和解释logging本身的含义,没有问题。


[此贴子已经被作者于2008-2-21 0:14:34编辑过]
板凳
发表于 2008-2-20 18:54:00 | 只看该作者

Q16

A. "it" is wrong

B. false comparision

C. correct.这里用 perfect tense 来表示发生了很次的事情。e.g. The city has been bombed five times.

Q23

firstly, either ...or

which is used to modify "logging" 解释作用

地板
 楼主| 发表于 2008-2-20 22:43:00 | 只看该作者

哦~~明白了

感谢啊

5#
发表于 2008-2-21 00:09:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用heslaw在2008-2-20 18:54:00的发言:

Q16

A. "it" is wrong

B. false comparision

C. correct.这里用 perfect tense 来表示发生了很次的事情。e.g. The city has been bombed five times.

Q23

firstly, either ...or

which is used to modify "logging" 解释作用

C用现在完成时,不能同意。

现在完成时表示的动作会延伸到现在并且会影响到现在,但是原句中的in any previous election,表明这个动作应该是在1992年的选举之前发生的,所以应该是过去完成时。而且C里面的动词是have been,也不合逻辑,have been后面省略的是什么?

在这个句子里面,a greater proportion是做more than half 的同位语的,同位语可以互相替换而基本上不影响句子的愿意,所以,为了突出作比较的双方,把这个句子改变一下:

Soaring television costs accounted for a greater proportion of the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992 than they have been in any previous election.

这样就可以看的很清楚了,they have been是不对的,为了跟accounted for一致,应该把been改成done,考虑到时态应该是had done。

如果按照B来改写的话,应该是这样:

Soaring television costs accounted for a greater proportion of the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992 than in any previous election.

than后面省略掉的完整成分是Soaring television costs accounted for,因为这些词在前面全部都出现过了,也不会引起误解,所以可以省略掉。

我支持B。

6#
发表于 2008-2-21 10:29:00 | 只看该作者

第一题有疑问:比较对象是什么?是不同时间的propotion,还是不同时间的costs?我认为是proportion,所以选了A。

B,比较结构的省略,容易造成proportion和costs的比较,为了使比较对象清楚,应该补出 it was;

C,they指代costs,比较对象不一致,错。

DE错误明显,不赘述

open to discuss.....

7#
发表于 2008-2-21 10:30:00 | 只看该作者

麻烦大家看看我的思路,指点一二,谢谢

8#
发表于 2008-2-21 17:25:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用足球幽灵在2008-2-21 10:29:00的发言:

第一题有疑问:比较对象是什么?是不同时间的propotion,还是不同时间的costs?我认为是proportion,所以选了A。

B,比较结构的省略,容易造成proportion和costs的比较,为了使比较对象清楚,应该补出 it was;

C,they指代costs,比较对象不一致,错。

DE错误明显,不赘述

open to discuss.....

是costs所占propotion的大小的比较,因为proportion在主句里面是动作的宾语,而than引导的从句里面用it was的话,句子结构就不对称了。所以也应该和主句结构一样,用costs做从句的主语,而不是proportion。因为句子结构不对称,所以即使用了it,it也不一定就可以代表proportion,还可以代表spending,或者presidential compaign,这样指代模糊,是肯定错误的。

gmat不支持根据词语的含义来推测代词的指代,这个在OG里面有很多例子了。至于你说的B省略太多不能构成比较,我倒是找到一个跟B差不多的例子:

大全509题

1.        More ancient Egyptian temples were constructed in the reign of Ramses II as in any other.

(A) as in any other

(B) as any other

(C) as in others

(D) than others

(E) than in any other

答案E

这一题也把in any other之前的所有成分都省略了,但是没有影响理解,因为省略掉的成分在前面都出现过,并且和主句的结构是一致的。所以我觉得B是可以的。个人认为,than引导的比较,按照平行原则,从句结构必须和主句结构一致,在结构一致的前提下,可以省略完全一样的成分,保留不一样的成分,突出比较的对象;有时候可以省略而不省略的话,甚至还会被认为是redundancy。这一点在不少的大全和OG题目上已经得到了验证。


[此贴子已经被作者于2008-2-21 17:32:52编辑过]
9#
发表于 2008-2-21 17:58:00 | 只看该作者

同意楼上,Q16选B

10#
发表于 2008-2-22 00:23:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用wangshu0306在2008-2-21 17:25:00的发言:

是costs所占propotion的大小的比较,因为proportion在主句里面是动作的宾语,而than引导的从句里面用it was的话,句子结构就不对称了。所以也应该和主句结构一样,用costs做从句的主语,而不是proportion。因为句子结构不对称,所以即使用了it,it也不一定就可以代表proportion,还可以代表spending,或者presidential compaign,这样指代模糊,是肯定错误的。

gmat不支持根据词语的含义来推测代词的指代,这个在OG里面有很多例子了。至于你说的B省略太多不能构成比较,我倒是找到一个跟B差不多的例子:

大全509题

1.        More ancient Egyptian temples were constructed in the reign of Ramses II as in any other.

(A) as in any other

(B) as any other

(C) as in others

(D) than others

(E) than in any other

答案E

这一题也把in any other之前的所有成分都省略了,但是没有影响理解,因为省略掉的成分在前面都出现过,并且和主句的结构是一致的。所以我觉得B是可以的。个人认为,than引导的比较,按照平行原则,从句结构必须和主句结构一致,在结构一致的前提下,可以省略完全一样的成分,保留不一样的成分,突出比较的对象;有时候可以省略而不省略的话,甚至还会被认为是redundancy。这一点在不少的大全和OG题目上已经得到了验证。


黄底字是我不同意的地方,理由请看OG10-132或OG11紫-92:

       According to a study by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, companies in the United States are providing job training and general education for nearly eight million people, about equivalent to the enrollment of the nation's four-year colleges and universities.

(A)  equivalent to the enrollment of

(B)  the equivalent of those enrolled in

(C)  equal to those who are enrolled in

(D)  as many as the enrollment of

(E)   as many as are enrolled in

此题中的比较对象people,同样是主句中动作的宾语,而且在比较结构中作了主语,如果按照wangshu0306所言,E选项应该直接排除,但是答案却是E。所以wangshu0306说的“因为proportion在主句里面是动作的宾语,而than引导的从句里面用it was的话,句子结构就不对称了”不能作为判断的依据,据此认为代词指代不好,也就无从说起。另外,我认为B项的错误在于,省略造成比较对象不清楚,如果说明比较对象是清楚的,自然这个判断就不对了,所以关键还是如何判断比较的对象。

wangshu0306,能否再看看,欢迎大家都来讨论,留下想法

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-3-14 20:43
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部