ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 5699|回复: 14
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[求助]OG187

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-3-14 13:46:00 | 只看该作者

[求助]OG187

187. In one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War, fought at Sharpsburg, Maryland, on September 17, 1862, four times as many Americans were killed as would later be killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day.


(A)     Americans were killed as


(B)     Americans were killed than


(C)     Americans were killed than those who


(D)     more Americans were killed as there fficeffice" />


(E)         more Americans were killed as those who


Choice A, the best answer, is the only option that accurately expresses the comparison by using the idiomatic form as many... as. In B and C, as many ... than is unidiomatic, and in C and E, those who is a wordy intrusion. In D and E, more is redundant because the phrase four times as many in the original sentence conveys the idea of more.

这里的as many as第二个as后面直接跟了一个句子,请问这里的as是什么词性?什么用法?

沙发
发表于 2004-3-15 11:10:00 | 只看该作者
     as many as 表示比较,比较的是句子,所以后面跟句子
板凳
发表于 2005-3-9 22:47:00 | 只看该作者

and in C and E, those who is a wordy intrusion.

why?前面不是有专门要不辱those什么的题吗?怎么这里就成了wordy??

地板
发表于 2005-3-10 22:27:00 | 只看该作者
up
5#
发表于 2006-2-8 18:04:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用小女公子在2005-3-9 22:47:00的发言:

and in C and E, those who is a wordy intrusion.


why?前面不是有专门要不辱those什么的题吗?怎么这里就成了wordy??


As many ... as中的第二个as可以做代词, 因此后面的those who就wordy

6#
发表于 2006-6-28 22:13:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用小女公子在2005-3-9 22:47:00的发言:

and in C and E, those who is a wordy intrusion.

why?前面不是有专门要不辱those什么的题吗?怎么这里就成了wordy??

你看这样理解对不对:

把those who代入原文

four times as many Americans were killed as those (who would later be killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day).

括号内的部分应该是做定语修饰前面的those, 这样一来就变成 Americans were killed和those 比较了,主谓结构和代词不具有可比性。

7#
发表于 2006-7-28 11:01:00 | 只看该作者

In one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War, fought at Sharpsburg, Maryland, on September 17, 1862, four times as many Americans were killed as would later be killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day.
  

我想請教的是這裡的 "would later be killed" 是什麼用法? 這邊用would是一種假設嗎? 如果是,為什麼要用假設? 還是只是表過去? 如果只是表過去,為什麼不說 ..... four times as many Americans were killed as were later killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day?

請求各位NN幫忙解惑阿~~


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-7-28 11:04:06编辑过]
8#
发表于 2006-7-28 11:28:00 | 只看该作者

[求助]OG187-新問題,拜託NN解惑

In one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War, fought at Sharpsburg, Maryland, on September 17, 1862, four times as many Americans were killed as would later be killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day.
  

我想請教的是這裡的 "would later be killed" 是什麼用法? 這邊用would是一種假設嗎? 如果是,為什麼要用假設? 還是只是表過去? 如果只是表過去,為什麼不說 ..... four times as many Americans were killed as were later killed on the beaches of Normandy during D-Day?

請求各位NN幫忙解惑阿~~

9#
发表于 2006-7-28 15:50:00 | 只看该作者
自己頂~~
10#
发表于 2006-7-28 21:23:00 | 只看该作者

过去将来时吧。

同意第二个as作代词的说法。OG里似乎有类似的,as many as are enrolled...

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:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-2-17 20:44
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部