OG13 8 关于指代模糊的问题

panwua

In late 1997, the chambers inside the pyramid of the Pharaoh Menkaure at Giza were closed to visitors for cleaning and repair due to moisture exhaled bv tourists, which raised its humidity to such levels so that salt from the stone was crystallizing and fungus was growing on the walls.

(A) due to moisture exhaled by tourists, which raised its humidity to such levels so that salt from the stone was crystallizing
(B) due to moisture that tourists had exhaled, thereby raising its humidity to such levels that salt from the stone would crystallize
(C) because tourists were exhaling moisture, which had raised the humidity within them to levels such that salt from the stone would crystallize
(D) because of moisture that was exhaled by tourists raising the humidity within them to levels so high as to make the salt from the stone crystallize
(E) because moisture exhaled by tourists had raised the humidity within them to such levels that salt from the stone was crystallizing

我感觉 CDE的them 都可以说是指代模糊啊 不知道是在说 chambers 还是tourists
为什么答案只说CD指代模糊
求解

看了千行 对这段话不太明白
*ron对 pronoun ambiguity的看法：
i break pronoun ambiguity down into two types:

(1) OBVIOUS pronoun ambiguity: the pronoun is PARALLEL to the WRONG noun, and is NON-parallel to the noun that is clearly intended.

(2) all other pronoun ambiguity.

if i see (1), i eliminate.
if i see (2), i DON'T necessarily eliminate, unless i have literally exhausted ALL other avenues of eliminating answers.

ron对这题的解释：

this is a pretty good example of a situation that satisfies my #2 above

i really meant what i said in that post -- the OG is not terribly consistent in its rules about pronoun ambiguity, so, unless you're looking at an extremely clear-cut case, you should ALWAYS look at anything else you can get your hands on first.
here's an alternative rule, which is much simpler to think about:
if you see an AMBIGUOUS PRONOUN that is SPLIT AGAINST A SPECIFIC NOUN -- i.e., it is replaced by a specific noun in other answer choices -- then you can probably feel safe in eliminating it.
if the ambiguous pronoun is NOT split against a specific noun, then you may want to think twice about eliminating it.
here, there's no specific noun in opposition to "them" (i.e., you don't see "them" vs. "those chambers" in other choices). so the ambiguity is not an issue worth thinking about.

ron的意思就是 指代模糊有两种  第一种是明显指代模糊 比如这一题的AB its 跟要指代的chambers 都没有agree
但他后面说的我没怎么看懂 什么是 AMBIGUOUS PRONOUN that is SPLIT AGAINST A SPECIFIC NOUN ？

panwua

求菊苣指教OJZ

panwua

有人吗。。

叶晴豆

如果楼主看过Ron的PPT截图就会知道，Ron提过：代词并不是一个好的split.
他所提到的第一类错误，也就是OBVIOUS pronoun ambiguity: the pronoun is PARALLEL to the WRONG noun, and is NON-parallel to the noun that is clearly intended. 这里之所以他说他看见会马上排除，是因为在语法中，有一条rule是默认如果后半句主语是一个代词，它会平行指代前半句的主语，即：S+V+O, and it/they...
如果一个句子中没有像这样明显的平行结构，代词指代歧义的优先级是非常低的，除非，你已经找不到其他的split。
Ron又提到一个地方，就是你不太明白的地方，这里说到一个代词和一个specific noun的split。该处的特殊名词指的就是要被代词指代的词，他的意思是，如果到最后，你发现有两个选项除了一句用了代词，一句直接说了specific noun，其他地方都相同，果断选specific noun，为什么呢，因为你用个代词还得去想这到底指代谁，直接把被指代词具体说出来又清晰有直接。
总而言之，不要去先纠结代词的歧义。
不过有一个小tips可以跟楼主分享，如果发现代词在句尾处，也就是非常靠后，请小心它是否会有歧义（因为可能前面符合条件的名词有很多）。

panwua

叶晴豆 发表于 2013-12-16 08:47
如果楼主看过Ron的PPT截图就会知道，Ron提过：代词并不是一个好的split.
他所提到的第一类错误，也就是OBVI ...

谢谢你~ 他说的第二个其实我大概懂一些 你给我确认了  不过这一题的them 真的不懂诶 其他选项用法相似就模糊 正确那个就明确 奇怪OJZ