[求助]新prep1，213

213.       (31838-!-item-!-188;#058&006170)       (GWD-3-Q34)

Shoppers in sporting goods stores, unlike in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, not buying a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but they leave with a basketball only

A. in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, not buying a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but they leave with a basketball only

B. in department stores, shop impulsively very little; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not also buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well

C. those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, do not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but leave with only a basketball

D. those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well

E. department stores, shop impulsively very little; someone will not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball but will leave with only a basketball

Will在and后可省，那么can可否？？

好问题.

我根据你的思路想到了这么一个例子:

I can play basketball and go to the court everyday.

这是否就造成了歧义:

1. 我能打球,并且能每天都去球场.

2. 我能打球,并且每天都去球场.

请NN们指教了~

还是那个原则，没有歧义的话可以省略

呵呵，感谢msuzengli兄夸奖哈，我个人有这么种感觉，因为后面and接否定not，所以这里will在后面省略是不歧义的。而msuzengli兄提的那个例子我个人认为也是不歧义的，就像另一位兄弟说的，这里面都会理解为我会打球而且每天都去球场，强说歧义我觉得是矫枉过正，不是gmac的本意。就像版主说的，不歧义就没问题。

还说打球的例子，如果改为I can play ball and not go ...这里面我认为很显然and后面就是省略can了，否则就不通了。其实学到今天我挺感谢gmac的，我觉得gmat的语法让我真正的感觉到一门语言是怎样用的。这个就是很好的例子，语言没有一定之规，因为语言的本意就是为了表达思想的，表达清楚了就是正确的语言。

有点跑题了。。说回我的例子，我认为如果后面and没有not还想表示将来时的话就一定要加will了，不然大家都会认为是现在时了。当然，我在cd上看见一个大牛说过，and前后的时态不一定必须是一致的，还是要看句意。也就是说，即使后面没有not也没有will也不能肯定就错了。这或许就是语言的魅力所在吧，当然也是每个人要过的那道坎。。。

这题C错在哪里呢?

请教一下,我读着知道C不顺,但是不知道错在哪