【呼叫版主】比较句中it的精确指代问题（不万不得已不打扰斑斑的。。）

春雨Q

春雨Q 发表于 2013-11-26 20:05
那这道题里A错在哪里呢。。。

GWD-26-Q20

啊。。。我知道了。。。不好意思斑斑~是我没看懂 打扰啦~


贴在这里，如果有同学不清楚的话就可以直接看到：

A真正错误的原因不是they的指代问题，而是：
hmm.

well, the meaning of the problem (which is clear to me - and, apparently according to the gmat people, clear to everyone else too) is that the kids were spending that many hours per week by 1997.

if you say "they had spent six hours a week by 1997", all this means is that they had gotten to 6 hrs/wk AT SOME POINT before 1997. it doesn't mean that they're still working that much.

--

analogy:

in 1980 forty percent of East High School class graduated; 67% of the class had graduated by 1997.
--> wrong. this would mean that half of the 1980 class had graduated at any time prior to 1997.

in 1980 forty percent of East High School class graduated; by 1997 the figure had grown to 67%.
--> correct. this would mean that 67% of the '97 class graduated (which is what we mean).

引自 RON http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/in-1981-children-in-the-united-states-t4406.html

aeoluseros

春雨Q 发表于 2013-11-26 20:05
那这道题里A错在哪里呢。。。

GWD-26-Q20

they确实是可以指代children in the United States的，语法上没有问题，只是逻辑上感觉起来不好，就是读的时候让人心里会有一丝疑虑："1981年做少于2.5小时家务的人和在1997年之前达到了7小时每周的人是同一群人吗？"，很subtle。GMAT喜欢在这种细节上让我们比较表达得最好最清晰的。

春雨Q

aeoluseros 发表于 2013-11-28 15:54
they确实是可以指代children in the United States的，语法上没有问题，只是逻辑上感觉起来不好，就是读的 ...

受教~感谢