OG１３３

joywzy · 发表于 2003-11-23 10:54:00

133. In Holland, a larger percentage of the gross national product is spent on defense of their coasts from rising seas than is spent on military defense in the United States.In Holland, a larger percentage of the gross national product is spent on defense of their coasts from rising seas than is spent on military defense in the United States.
In Holland they spend a larger percentage of their gross national product on defending their coasts from rising seas than the United States does on military defense.
A larger percentage of Holland's gross national product is spent on defending their coasts from rising seas than the United States spends on military defense.
Holland spends a larger percentage of its gross national product defending its coasts from rising seas than the military defense spending of the United States.
Holland spends a larger percentage of its gross national product on defending its coasts from rising seas than the United States does on military defense.
In choices A, B, and C, the plural pronouns their and they have no plural noun for a logical referent. Since In Holland modifies all of the sentence that follows, A states confusedly that Holland spends a percentage of its gross national product on military defense in the United States. In C, the passive is spent is not parallel with the active spends. Lack of parallelism in choice D produces an illogical comparison: the percentage that Holland spends is said to exceed not the percentage that the United States spends but rather its total military defense
spending. Parallel phrasing allows E, the best choice, to make a logical comparison between what Holland spends and what the United States does [spend].

ＯＧ这句话的解释是什么意思啊？

Lack of parallelism in choice D produces an illogical comparison: the percentage that Holland spends is said to exceed not the percentage that the United States spends but rather its total military defense
spending.

谢谢。

iinobscurity · 发表于 2003-11-23 11:10:00

而不是 its total military defense(美国所有的军事费用)比较
比例与比例相比才会对平行

dreamerdream · 发表于 2004-5-4 23:42:00

问选项A，为何不能看成是省略主语的方式呢？因为两句的都是the percentage of the gross national product.

奇怪！！

flowerrainn · 发表于 2004-5-26 23:13:00

以下是引用dreamerdream在2004-5-4 23:42:00的发言：

问选项A，为何不能看成是省略主语的方式呢？因为两句的都是the percentage of the gross national product.

奇怪！！

A中，THEIR的用法就已经错了呀。好像也没有省略主语的，要不就是同时省略主语和谓语，要不就是省略宾语。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-5-26 23:14:52编辑过]

susanyaki · 发表于 2004-5-28 18:24:00

你理解错了，而是A读起来像holland把一部分钱花在美国的military defense 上了

tomrchu · 发表于 2004-7-5 16:14:00

以下是引用joywzy在2003-11-23 10:54:00的发言：

ＯＧ这句话的解释是什么意思啊？

Lack of parallelism in choice D produces an illogical comparison: the percentage that Holland spends is said to exceed not the percentage that the United States spends but rather its total military defense
spending.

谢谢。

我觉得是说如果像D那样，就是将一个percentage与一个spending在比较，不满足parallelism

titatita · 发表于 2006-1-26 17:44:00

以下是引用dreamerdream在2004-5-4 23:42:00的发言：

问选项A，为何不能看成是省略主语的方式呢？因为两句的都是the percentage of the gross national product.

奇怪！！

因为荷兰的gdp与美国的gdp是一类事物中两个不同的具体事物,所以than后面主语不能省略,可以用that of us来代替

og说的很明确因为省略了主语,a看起来象荷兰的gdp用在了美国

snowfield · 发表于 2006-7-4 03:55:00

以下是引用titatita在2006-1-26 17:44:00的发言：

因为荷兰的gdp与美国的gdp是一类事物中两个不同的具体事物,所以than后面主语不能省略,可以用that of us来代替

og说的很明确因为省略了主语,a看起来象荷兰的gdp用在了美国

即便按照‘将部分荷兰的gdp用在美国的军事上’也不能单独省略主语，没见过省略主语却保留谓语的吧？

peterchang · 发表于 2006-9-9 16:24:00

以下是引用snowfield在2006-7-4 3:55:00的发言：

以下是引用titatita在2006-1-26 17:44:00的发言：

因为荷兰的gdp与美国的gdp是一类事物中两个不同的具体事物,所以than后面主语不能省略,可以用that of us来代替

og说的很明确因为省略了主语,a看起来象荷兰的gdp用在了美国

即便按照‘将部分荷兰的gdp用在美国的军事上’也不能单独省略主语，没见过省略主语却保留谓语的吧？

ding，如果题干真的问”荷兰的gdp用在了美国”那ａ的than用法是否正确？？

kky · 发表于 2006-9-19 14:18:00

这里做的是两个国家在某种东西上的花费的比较句子本身应该没有问题但是这样的正确在考试里没有意义啊

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2012-SC-29 (ISDG)

OG１３３

OG１３３

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()