OG12 SC101 看一下~~OG为什么说when为什么放错地方了！

同问~为什么语法笔记上说B的they无所指呢
这个句子里能用they指代的只有signs一个，其他名词都不可能。they的指代和状语从句的修饰对象没什么关系吧，除非代词指代有多个可能。
可是这只有一个可能啊，也符合逻辑。

我想了半天，觉得有一个说法说得通，就是B里面是
An executive （who is heavily committed to a course of action）,（ especially one that worked well in the past,） makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

是an executive makes sth. likely这样怪怪的，缺少一个原因，为什么an executive makes sth. likely？表述的不是很清晰，设想一下，如果when they do appear改一下形式,放在句首——

When missing sighs do appear, an excutive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes sth. likely .这样是不是因果关系就清晰多了呢？就像E里面，逻辑关系其实就表述的很清楚。所以我觉得B的问题不在于语法什么的，在于谁表达得更好，个人浅见哈~

我想了半天，觉得有一个说法说得通，就是B里面是
An executive （who is heavily committed to a course of action）,（ especially one that worked well in the past,） makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

是an executive makes sth. likely这样怪怪的，缺少一个原因，为什么an executive makes sth. likely？表述的不是很清晰，设想一下，如果when they do appear改一下形式,放在句首——

When missing sighs do appear, an excutive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes sth. likely .这样是不是因果关系就清晰多了呢？就像E里面，逻辑关系其实就表述的很清楚。所以我觉得B的问题不在于语法什么的，在于谁表达得更好，个人浅见哈~

我想了半天，觉得有一个说法说得通，就是B里面是
An executive （who is heavily committed to a course of action）,（ especially one that worked well in the past,） makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

是an executive makes sth. likely这样怪怪的，缺少一个原因，为什么an executive makes sth. likely？表述的不是很清晰，设想一下，如果when they do appear改一下形式,放在句首——

When missing sighs do appear, an excutive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes sth. likely .这样是不是因果关系就清晰多了呢？就像E里面，逻辑关系其实就表述的很清楚。所以我觉得B的问题不在于语法什么的，在于谁表达得更好，个人浅见哈~