GWD-29-Q29 这道题灰常纠结

Jialana

B选项被动语态不好，was previously paid.

cathyghy

今天也错了这题。
B是不是因为：逗号前的核心词其实是the cost（因为有of 嘛），逗号后的部分应该是补充说明cost，所以for which was previously paid $7 per year中的which如果指代cost的话，意思就不对了。
而D 中the $7 正好是the cost的同位语，补充说明。

欢迎NN指正……

raremagic

B最少要改为....education, for which $7 per year was previously paid. 语句顺序错了...
E 是搭配错了contribute sth to/toward sth， 不用for
这题我错选的C ,previous的问题楼上都指出了, compare to 和 compare with 的区别应该不是要点
我做题的时候排除D选C是因为D的instead of...离修饰的部位太远

cynthia628

我记得prep破解上说，英语语法中compare with表比较，compare to表比喻。但是在GMAT语法中，compare with/to都可以表比较，注意比较对象要一致，这里介词的不同不是考点。

ssyy23

不明白

chineuro

此题很可能不是标准的GMAT试题，可绕开走。

gudjohnssen

A) "previously paying $7 per year" should refer to the students, which would make it a noun modifier, which is required to be placed next to the noun it modifies. It isn't. Incorrect.

B) this time the phrase isn't even clear - "for which was previously paid" makes no sense

C) "previously" is an adverb and should refer to a verb, but $7 is a noun - you'd need the adjective "previous" here. And really you'd want to say something like "compared to the previous requirement of $7 per year"

D) I'm not a huge fan of this source. I assume the reason to eliminate this one is non-specification that the $7 per year required previously was specifically required for higher education. But I don't think the real test would make this the only distinction. They might also try to claim something's wrong with "instead of" (rather than "as opposed to" in answer E), but instead of can properly refer to a noun, as it does here... so it's fine.

E) See above.

                                                                                       Quoted from Stacey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C错在previously副词修饰名词$7。

-- by 会员 KimiHana (2010/7/31 23:44:38)

看这个关于C的解释应该是最贴切的了，previous应该修饰一个副词而不是一个名词短语

hscryzer

这一题预期讨论BE还不如看AD，BE的语意已经略微改变了，A的后缀ving修饰主语其他句子里正确的作为选项的都有过，但是这里判错了

andy2086

FROM MANHATTAN:
"previously paying $7 per year" should refer to the students, which would make it a noun modifier, which is required to be placed next to the noun it modifies. It isn't. Incorrect.

B) this time the phrase isn't even clear - "for which was previously paid" makes no sense

C) "previously" is an adverb and should refer to a verb, but $7 is a noun - you'd need the adjective "previous" here. And really you'd want to say something like "compared to the previous requirement of $7 per year"

D) I'm not a huge fan of this source. I assume the reason to eliminate this one is non-specification that the $7 per year required previously was specifically required for higher education. But I don't think the real test would make this the only distinction. They might also try to claim something's wrong with "instead of" (rather than "as opposed to" in answer E), but instead of can properly refer to a noun, as it does here... so it's fine.

E) See above.

劳小狮

B.        year toward the cost of higher education, for which was previously paid $7 per year
          既然which指代的是the cost of 高等教育,直接接上which was previous $7 per year不就好了吗？原句重复意群:the cost was previously paid for $7 per year