There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.
我记得LZM的书中公理有说:which决不可以前面的整个句子.这种说法应该在official guide中也有体现. 大家看看下一题如何解答 5 (There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.) a)There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing. b)There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished. c)There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing. d)Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished. e)Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished. C中的which的用法好像有违背这个公理,大家讨论一下
我想这题在A,C选项中只能看逻辑关系，试把There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing补全就是There are no legal limits, as there are no legal limits for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing,这样一看马上觉得逻辑非常怪，再加上their是复数，所以可以排除A。
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2003-12-22 21:16:00
楼主
