227. Judicial rules in many states require that the identities of all prosecution witnesses are made known to defendants so they can attempt to rebut the testimony, but the Constitution explicitly requires only that the defendant have the opportunity to confront an accuser in court. (A) that the identities of all prosecution witnesses are made known to defendants so they can attempt to rebut (B) that the identities of all prosecution witnesses be made known to defendants so that they(语法上优先指代identities,但是逻辑上只能是人,所以往后找,找到宾语defendants,既是.) can attempt to rebut (C) that the defendants should know the identities of all prosecution witnesses so they can attempt a rebuttal of (D) the identities of all prosecution witnesses should be made known to defendants so they can attempt rebutting(B) (E) making known to defendants the identities of all prosecution witnesses so that they can attempt to rebut In English the subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or requirement that a certain course of action be taken. Such phrasing takes the form to wish [or] require that x be y, not that x should be y or that x is y. Choice B, therefore, is best. In place of the subjunctive, A uses the indicative are and E uses an awkward gerund, making, while C and D contain the unnecessary should. A and C also omit that after so, and D omits that after require. The phrase attempt to rebut is more idiomatic than the phrases that replace it in C and D. Choices C and E awkwardly place the plural noun witnesses between the plural pronoun they and its referent, defendants.
这题是真正不是指代主语的
GEMJ评论:
GEMJ的解释 B选项中的they的指代不是完美清晰的。凡是不符合“优先指代”规则的情况都会出现这样的问题。 但不能说这种情况就是指代不清了,因为这个选项从逻辑的角度看,其中they是不可能指代identities的,只能指代人。从逻辑的角度能够清晰地判断其指代对象。 更不能说这就是错误的,毕竟“优先指代”是“优先”,不是永远。 或者说违背“优先指代”规则的选项有可能是正确的选项。 毕竟,世界上没有完美无缺的语言。 或者以安哥的话来说,这只是EFFECTIVENESS的问题,而非CORRECTIVENESS |