两题语法的比较[注意]:大全305，补充188+kaplan一题

midnight

1, For many travelers,charter vacations often turn out to cost considerably more than they originally seemed.
A
B they originally seem to
C they seemingly would cost originally
D it seemed originally
E it originallyseemed they would


Ir is from LZM  E3-1(P38)
The answer is A.

Pls check this one:

2.Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates,and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plantics are taking  more time to deteriorate than:
A they originally seemed
B they seemed originally
C it seemed that they would origionally
D it originally seemed
E it originally seemed they would

It is form KAPLAN,and the answer is E.

What do you think?

To tell you the truth,I think Kaplan is more credible.LZM sometimes makes mistakes,for example,E1-13 in LZM and OG183 are the same question,but have different answers.Which one do you chose?Of course OG.Any comments?

1stzhang

1, for many travelers,charter vacations often turn out to cost considerably more than they originally seemed.
a
b they originally seem to
c they seemingly would cost originally
d it seemed originally
e it originallyseemed they would


ir is from lzm  e3-1(p38)
the answer is a.

pls check this one:

2.researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates,and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plantics are taking  more time to deteriorate than:
a they originally seemed
b they seemed originally
c it seemed that they would origionally
d it originally seemed
e it originally seemed they would

这两个题目是这样的，（1）因为原文种只有一个复数概念，所以用they originally seemed
是没有问题的，并且意思十分合理（2）文中有两个复数概念，一般说来说这种简单的比较they就是指的是主语那么句子的意思就不明确了。大家之所以有疑问是对 seem的用法不熟悉，其实(2)的E答案的完整形式是：it originally seemed (to researchers that) they would。这样就可以避免歧义的发生。

merlion

比较一下：
in 1) vacations turn out to cost more than they originally seemed ( to cost ...)
       vacations turn out to cost more than it originally seemed they would (turn out to cost...)
parallel:turn out to cost & seemed ( to cost )

in 2) plantics are taking  more ... than they originally seemed ( to take ...) /but "in front of "than" is "taking" not "take"
       plantics are taking  more ... than it originally seemed they would (take...)
parallel:are taking  & would (take...)

so i think in 2) e is better.

i am not sure, you can correct me  

renprince

的确是用平行进行分析
严重同意merlion

midnight

以下是引用merlion在2003-8-7 11:17:00的发言：
比较一下：
in 1) vacations turn out to cost more than they originally seemed ( to cost ...)
        vacations turn out to cost more than it originally seemed they would (turn out to cost...)
parallel:turn out to cost & seemed ( to cost )

in 2) plantics are taking  more ... than they originally seemed ( to take ...) /but "in front of "than" is "taking" not "take"
        plantics are taking  more ... than it originally seemed they would (take...)
parallel:are taking  & would (take...)

so i think in 2) e is better.

i am not sure, you can correct me  

Thank you for your message,merlion,but:

for 1,why do you add "turn out to cost" after "....it origionally seemed they would"?I mean what is your basis?What if I add "cost",so the whole sentence is "...vacations turn out to cost more than it originally seemed they would ( cost...)?

for 2,if we are talking about parallelism,I think the sentence "  plantics are taking  more ... than they originally seemed ( to take ...) " is more parellel than the sentence " plantics are taking  more ... than it originally seemed they would (take...)".Plus the former is not so wordy as the later.

I guess the key of this question is that these two expressions  have different meanings.But I am not sure.

rachelywq

但是如果从表达的简洁这一角度来看的话，似乎第二道的e就不是太好了？？？

其实我在做kap时碰到这道题就错了，一直都不大明白？还有别的解释吗？？？我是严重糊涂啊！！！

terrygoodboy200

关键是it在句子里到底做什么出现。

merlion

for 1), add "cost" not right, 是省略了"to cost", not "cost". but if i add "to cost" after "would", apparently not right.
for 2), there is no "to take" in front of "than"

pyndick

以下是引用terrygoodboy2004在2003-8-7 13:06:00的发言：
关键是it在句子里到底做什么出现。

I also cannot find the referrent of “it” in 2

rachelywq

以下是引用pyndick在2003-8-7 18:53:00的发言：
I also cannot find the referrent of “it” in 2

对呀！这个问题我在做的时候好像就是因为它而把这个答案坚定不移的给排除掉了！很是不明白呀？？？

向大虾们求助了！！！

木川

我觉得kaplan的这个答案有误，故意复杂化。it 没有明确的指代对象。按照平行结构的要求：结构相等，功能相同，概念对等，连接对象不能有争议。it originally seem they would 跟前面的句子不平行，而且如果是it 引导的主语从句，那么seem后面也应该加that.
愚见，请指教