ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

In laboratory rats, a low dose of aspirin usually suffices to block production of thromboxane, which is a substance that promotes blood clotting, but not seriously interfering with the production of prostacyclin, which prevents clotting.

正确答案: C

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2223|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教prep 07 1-35

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2016-7-30 11:19:43 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
35.       (26325-!-item-!-188;#058&002592)






  In laboratory rats, a low dose of aspirin usually suffices to block production of thromboxane, which is a substance that promotes blood clotting, but not seriously interfering with the production of prostacyclin, which prevents clotting.






(A) which is a substance that promotes blood clotting, but not seriously interfering






(B) a substance that promotes blood clotting, but not seriously interfering






(C) a substance that promotes blood clotting, but does not seriously interfere






(D) which is a substance to promote blood clotting, but does not seriously interfere
(E) which is a substance that promotes blood clotting, but not a serious interference
answer is C

想请教一下为什么D不对,有NN说是因为D中的to do表目的,改变了原句的意思,但还是不太理解。
是不是因为D和C的逻辑论元不同,一个是promote, 另一个则是substance.

收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2016-7-30 12:22:33 | 只看该作者
这里附上Manhattan Prep的Ron大神的解释,希望对楼主有帮助^^
"there are two problems i see in (d).
problem #1
a substance to promote... is unidiomatic.
the only context in which i can remember "a NOUN to VERB" is a context in which the NOUN is abstract in nature. for instance:
a way to produce goods
a reason to try harder
etc.
note that "substance" is a concrete item; it's not an abstraction like "way" or "reason".

if you're talking about concrete objects, you should replace the infinitive with something else. for instance:
* a substance to promote X (incorrect) --> a substance that promotes X (correct)
* a tool to install the shelves (incorrect) --> a tool with which to install the shelves (correct)

problem #2
"which is" is unnecessary and ugly.

if "which is" is followed by a description of something, you should just omit it, producing an appositive modifier:
X, which is a substance... (ugly) --> X, a substance... (better)
Person X, who is the coach of Team Y (ugly) --> Person X, the coach of Team Y (better)
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2016-7-30 14:32:46 | 只看该作者
谢谢楼上
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, 2024-12-28 19:00
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