GWD-1-7

tianc

anyone, prep also.

GWD1-Q7:

A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.

 

1. that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times

2. that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times

3. that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio

4. CEO’s who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio

5. CEO’s now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times

answer is B or C (prep answer)

So confused, so many discussion before, still not result

yedeanboy

prep说是C，那就只好是C了，那还咋办阿？

Hamiton

试着分析一下：首先D,E 肯定不对。其次，在倍数比较中，我们用 419 times as ~ as 或 419 times + n., 所以A也不对，因为倍数+ more than是典型的比较错误。

然后，使用compare时，如果不是动作发出者(人)，必须用被动，这里ratio肯定是被compare, 排除B.

最后，只剩C了, 前半句的比较形式是对的，ratio在后面做同位语，as compared to用法不熟悉。查了langman，没有明显的词条，搜索了OG，语法中没有出现，逻辑和阅读里各出现过一次。查了google，发现这是个常用的词组，多放在句尾表比较，相对应的前面比较对象不定。

试理解：as 这里做连词，后面故意省略了类似it is的结构，这样可以灵活的使用，来表达与前面某部分(可以是主语或宾语)比较的含义。如果单独使用compared的话，放在句子前面要逻辑主语一致，放在后面。。。好像不常见，也许as compared to是 compare 放在后面的的优选形式？

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-27 1:24:38编辑过]

Hamiton

另外这道题还有两个小语法点，大家看分析的对不对

1. an average of 被  “,on average, ” 代替了，明显逻辑意思清楚了很多，an average 和 419 times more pay是平等关系，不能用所属关系(of) 来表达，嗯，以后要注意

2. CEO's 代表CEO的复数，不是所有格，因为他要对应后面的复数workers。这里5个选项是一样的，并没有考这一点，但的确给理解题意带来了困难。据查，很多人认为这样表达是不对的(Plural of Acronym)，但 New York Times 已经这样使用了，我们就不管这么多了，记住再说吧

Hamiton

看到又有人问，自己顶一下，大家多提意见讨论讨论

流浪猫猫2008

啊~茅塞顿开~~compared to好象只能用被动形式的,可是有一点还是不明白,as compared to 42 times their pay,这到底怎么翻译? as如果后面省略了it is,那这个it is 又指代谁呢? their又指代谁呢?我当时选B的时候就是因为觉得C里面their根本就说不清是谁.

大家多讨论一下此题~~~~~~

阿土莎莎

还是很困惑啊呵呵。。

heyii

喜欢这个解释~这个题目告诉我们，所以不要一看到被逗号分开的就是罗嗦了。。。毕竟是选最优答案。至少要保证基本语法正确才考虑是否罗嗦。
A. that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times
    


        

A is incorrect. The comparison is illogical. The pay of CEOs is being compared to blue-collar workers. To make the sentence correct, add the auxiliary do after blue-collar workers.


        

    
    
        
                
            
            
                
            
        

Quote:

B. that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times

    
        

I don't like the second part; a ratio that compares to 42 times.


        

    
    
        
                
            
            
                
            
        

Quote:

C. that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio

    
        

C is the best. The basis of comparison is the same: 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers vs 42 times their pay.


        

    
    
        
                
            
            
                
            
        

Quote:

D. CEO’s who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio

    
        

D is incorrect. The first part is a relative clause; the subordinate clause is incomplete.


        

    
    
        
                
            
            
                
            
        

Quote:

E. CEO’s now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times

    
        

E is incorrect. The first part needs an auxiliary verb; earning is a present participle, not a verb.


        

It is indeed a very difficult English question.  

Aquafer

请问NN，42times their pay中的their代指什么？blue-collar worker's?似乎有指代不清的嫌疑啊

itcemzh

以下是引用Aquafer在2008-7-19 18:51:00的发言：
请问NN，42times their pay中的their代指什么？blue-collar worker's?似乎有指代不清的嫌疑啊

嗯，看了分析，我认为是指workers