再问OG 129

ninaluan

129。In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell, and they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have

看过以前的贴子，还是没明白，前面是have cut，后面是are priced这样平衡吗？谢谢！

Snazzy

parallelism is unnecessary here, as they are two sentences

fbfamous

我这么认为：

无论do指的是sell还是do sell(强调）都能讲的通，因为我觉得sell本身的意思变了：be priced to sell是定价销售，而后面的sell是卖出去了。换句话说，前面的sell是卖，后面的sell是卖出去了。

为什么这么讲？因为：根据逻辑：酒商要减少库存，那么他们想的办法就是定价销售，结果是确实卖的不错。

至于为什么sell能当“卖出去了”讲，我这么想的，大家常说：it sells well.就是这个卖的不错的意思，这个卖隐含了什么？不就是卖出去了，且卖出去的很多么？同理，去掉well那就是卖出去了（不说卖出去的是多还是不多，反正我卖出去了）这样就是我说的sell的第2个意思了。

至于they我觉得明显是酒商，要不然肯定they和their是矛盾的，ETS不会自己抽自己嘴巴的。

CedricLi

以下是引用ninaluan在2004-2-2 13:59:00的发言：
129。In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell, and they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have

看过以前的贴子，还是没明白，前面是have cut，后面是are priced这样平衡吗？谢谢！

我有过同样的困惑。

原因是读题时的思路完全按照“‘they’指代intalian vintners”，因为根据ETS的思路来将，代词在同一句话中不能有引起误会的可能。因此在考虑答案时走入了“本句已省略了"PRICE"这一动作”这样的死胡同，无法讲通这句句子。

在这句话中，这个They理应指代their wines（from collins cobuild:If something SELLs,it is bought by the public,usually in fairly large quantity.）。由此想请问各位大牛在做题时的思路，在遇到这类省略句的时候有何绝招来更准确的排除干扰，更有效地找到真实被省略的部分？