[讨论]can we change the logic relationship of the original text?

momoyu

It’s absolutely that we cannot change the tone of the original text. Can we change the logic relationship then? I previous thought it is not permitted, while I am now confused. Here’s an example:

OG86. Having the right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper's bullet during the First World War. Horace Pippin, a Black American painter, worked by holding the brush in his right hand and guiding its movements with his left

(A)  Having the right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper's bullet during the First World War

(B)   In spite of his right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper's bullet during the First World War

(C)  Because there had been a sniper's bullet during the First World War that crippled his right hand and arm

(D)  The right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper's bullet during the First World War

(E)His right hand and arm crippled by a sniper's bullet during the First World War

The origianl "having..." indicates a cause-result relationship, while choice E does not. My understanding is that we should not change the tone or logic relationship of the original text, if yes, why not B? Although "in spite of" is not exactly equivalent to "because", it makes sense to a certain level. Besides, I don't think "in spite of + concise n." is a solid reason to give up choice B.

momoyu

seems that no one cares this topic. Hope it is not an important one.