OG2017上一道新的语法题有点意思

RyanR

Making things even more difficult has been general market inactivity lately, if not paralysis, which has provided little in the way of pricing guidance.
A has been general market inactivity lately, if not paralysis, which has provided
B there is general market inactivity, if not paralysis, lately it has provided
C general market inactivity, if not paralysis, has lately provided
D lately, general market inactivity, if not paralysis, has provided
E is that lately general market inactivity, if not paralysis, which provides








Answer Key里面给的答案是D，然而，这句话出自纽约时报的原句，这个原句exactly是答案A。不知道是不是Answer Key写错了？大家可以讨论一下，或者有新书的同学出来讲一下。
附纽约时报原句：http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/garden/05appraisal.html?_r=0
我来造福一下人类，把官方答案贴上来，大家比对一下：
This sentence uses a special inverted structure,
putting the predicate [Making things even more
difficult) before the verb {has been) and the
subject. In this construction, the subjcct {general
market inactivity) can be directly compared with
paralysis. Such contrasts are best made using
phrases that are adjacent, not separated by other
material (here，the adverb lately). ] f a more
normal clause structure is used, making things
even more dijficult becomes a modifier, not the
main predicate, so it should be clearly set off from
the rest of the clause with a comma.
A This inverted structure makes general market
activity the subjcct o f Making things even
more difficult. This would be legitimate
by itself, but it requires general market
inactivity to be next to both i f not paralysis
(for contrast) and which (marking a relative
clause modifying inactivity). It cannot be
next to both of these simultaneously.
B This is a run-on sentence, with two
independent clauses {Making things
even more difficult there is general market
inactivity, i f not paralysis and lately it has
provided little in the way of pricing guidance)
conjoined merely by a comma, rather than
by a coordinating conjunction, such as and.
Also，the initial topic phrase {Making things
even more difficult) is awkward without a
following comma.
C The initial topic phrase (Making things
even more difficult) should be followed by a
comma.
D Correct. Tht topic phrase (Making things
even more difficult) is properly separated
from the subject by a comma, and inactivity
and if not paralysis are adjacent for the
clearest connection between them.
E This is a sentence fragment.

青衫负雪

我就说下我的理解哈，这里making things more difficult 的动作的发出者是general market inactivity. A选项的if not paralysis的主语是making things more difficult。感觉错在这里。

naon

C和D没分清，求解答

Narcisuss_d

我选的是D，不过确实也搜到nytimes的原文是A。
我排除A的原因是：非限定性定语从句中的which，与先行词general market inactivity（我理解的先行词是这个），隔得太远了。GMAT中，which引导非限定性定语从句，要紧跟先行词。
再看D，which紧跟general market inactivity，这实在是太完美了。

我觉得可能GMAC认为nytimes原文句子按照他们的规则就是错误或者不够完美的，所以他们改了一个更完美的句子。
我们只能跟着GMAC制定的规则走

onr5

这题的确很有意思，说说自己的理解。
仔细想了下，NYT原文里面，应该是倒装，也就是说正常语序是“General market inactivity(if not paralysis) has been lately making things even more difficult”。
但是重点是，GMAC会认为①不结合上下文无端倒装是unnecessarily awkward, 再加上②which会指代不清，所以跟原文对着干把倒装拿掉，用making...做modifier, 这样语序也顺了，也没有指代歧义了。

没钱买新书的小伙伴自己的理解，请问OG解释怎么说的啊。

mapleaf

楼主贴一下新题的Answer Key呗

spoooon

我觉得A的话lately状语的修饰和which关系代词的指代都有歧义...

南十紫星

我觉得general market inactivity在这里是一个同位语，进一步描述Making things even more difficult这个策略，而这个策略对价格的指导几乎没有帮助。

limo920

1. A的skeleton 是：Making things difficult（主语） has been（谓语） inactivity（宾语）, which has provided little... 逻辑层面的意思错误，可以改成：What's making things difficult (recently) has been inactivity, 或者把making things difficult 变成 inactivity的前置状语（这也是GMAC喜欢的套路）
2. A 里面的 lately 错误修饰 has been
3. 至于which的修饰，个人觉得倒不是最关键的点。if not paralysis 是个简短的修饰成分。which／that都可以跳跃修饰成分（只要修饰成分不含有动词）

Tea813

同一7楼解释。。。

“我觉得A的话lately状语的修饰和which关系代词的指代都有歧义...”

which 修饰 paralysis 还是 inactivity？