OG159 与OG209同样问题解释不同 请注意

159. While depressed property values can hurt some large investors, they are potentially devastating for home-owners, whose equity—in many cases representing a life’s savings—can plunge or even disappear.

(A) they are potentially devastating for homeowners, whose

(B) they can potentially devastate homeowners in that their

(C) for homeowners they are potentially devastating, because their

(D) for homeowners, it is potentially devastating in that their（A）

(E) it can potentially devastate homeowners, whose

Choice A is the best. Its wording is unambiguous and economical. The plural pronoun they agrees with its antecedent, property values

in A the referent of they is unclear

大家可以看到，由if/while引导的subodinate clause从句在前，主句在后，并且同样是主句主语是代词，为什么一个是可以指代，一个是指代不清，难道是选项比较吗？有点晕，望大家讨论一下，谢谢

209题哪里有从句？

况且209题考的主要是并列吧

问题并不是为什么209不选A，而是ＯＧ解释的理由我觉得有问题：

if employers hired illegal aliens
        they would be penalized.OG解释：they指代不清

While depressed property values can hurt some large investors, they are potentially devastating for home-owners：OG解释: they 指代values.

这两句都是subordinate clause,而且也都是主句主语是代词，从句中有两个复数名词，可是为什么解释不一样呢？

帮忙解释一下。谢谢

难道是因为一个从句有逗号，一个没有逗号？

真是有点糊涂

请NN帮着分析一下。谢谢

楼主有点钻牛角尖了

我们所谓的指代不清，是指用常识判断后仍然不清

While depressed property values can hurt some large investors, they are potentially devastating for home-owners：这句话，明显investors和home owners是一类

概念，they当然是指代  values了

但是第2题不同

 they 既可指代雇主也可以指代非法雇员，两者都可以受到惩罚

这就是gmac眼中的指代不清

绝非机械的判断

如二楼所说，这一题考的应该并列问题。senate通过的立法内容有两个，一个是grant………，另一个是penalize，一步就出答案。

楼主可能想太多，如楼上所说。

有道理，明白了，还是逻辑关系最重要。