OG186，看了好多帖子，可忍不住还想问。。。

186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to a hotel.

(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to

(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to

(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining them in

(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in

(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to

答案是E: Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to a hotel.

如果从instead of 的搭配来看是可以把E选出来的。

根据OG理解，be confined 应该和go home并列，也就是allow members of the jury to be confined to a hotel，那么翻译下来就应该是：“允许陪审团成员被限制在一个酒店里”，感觉好别扭，“被限制”这种限制人身自由的倒霉事还用“允许”？是不是从逻辑上不太合理呢？

如果A选项的instead of 改成rather than，让to confine 和to allow并列是不是就更合理一些？

Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than to confine them to a hotel.
哎呀！糟糕！我晕了！在写这个问题时又觉得motion来confine人好像也不合理。。。

谁来帮帮我呀？？

这个句子我觉得应该这样理解：

1. Members of the jury are confined to a hotel at the end of each day.
2. There was motion to allow members to go home at the end of each day.
3. Judge denied that motion.

allow somebody to do X rather than to do Y的结构里，to do Y不是allow的对象，它只是和to do X建立一种逻辑上的对立关系。换句话说，to do Y 是不需要被allow的，但是not to do Y是需要的。因为在本结构里，to do Y是被否定的，也就是说从逻辑上讲是allow somebody to not do Y。

所以，在这种情况，不应该简单地将to do X rather than 去掉然后考虑allow to do Y是不是合理。

Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to a hotel

拒绝先不看

当他是允许

也就是JB这个人允许一个motion（感觉意思就是行为），什么行为呢，允许JURY的成员每天都回家而不是呆在hotel里

现在把【允许】换成【拒绝】

意思就是JB拒绝这个motion，也就是拒绝【JURY的成员回家而不是呆在hotel里】－－－－想回家，没门！

rather than 后面省略了to，不定式平行，第二个to可以省略的