ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 614|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

走过路过,别忘进来帮俺:)

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2009-8-3 19:46:00 | 只看该作者

走过路过,别忘进来帮俺:)

As its sales of computer products have surpassed those of measuring instruments , the company has become increasingly willing to compete for the mass market sales they would in the past have conceded to rivals.

C that in the past would have been conceded previously to rivals

D it previously would have conceded to rivals in the past

答案

C INCORRECT.

   the passive-voice construction in this context is weak and ambiguous

D INCORRECT

   the placement of in the past makes it unclear whether it is supposed to modify rivals or would have conceded; if the latter , then it is redundant.

牛牛们帮帮忙,这两个选项答案不理解.或给出自己的解释也可


[此贴子已经被作者于2009/8/4 20:42:57编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2009-8-3 23:18:00 | 只看该作者
我觉得是previously和in the past语义重复。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2009-8-4 20:46:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用sunny8843在2009/8/3 23:18:00的发言:
我觉得是previously和in the past语义重复。

 恩.这个我懂了.但是我不懂的是og 中的解释

地板
发表于 2009-8-4 23:33:00 | 只看该作者

C选项是market sales that in the past would have been conceded previously to rivals  定从是修饰market sales 的    market sales in the past would have been conceded previously to rivals    OG的意思是说用被动语态表达is weak and ambiguous   这题的意思用主动语态表达更直接明确

D选项it previously would have conceded to rivals in the past

in the past可能修饰rival 也可能修饰conceded 修饰对象不明确    

而且如果修饰的是conceded的话 和 previously就重复了   因为previously也是修饰conceded的 

这是我对OG的理解  希望有帮助  昨天刚看过  仅供参考吧

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:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-6-27 01:16
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