牛牛们帮忙看看啊

jnlvo

1. 似乎还是对题的理解的问题，我感觉misleading to voters who understand 意思是误导了voters，这些voters现在understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide ，这样答案显然是A。

如果是D，理解就是误导了(understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide )的voters，不过D对这种voters有什么样的影响，我想这可能是don't understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide, 这样understand 的反应应该谈不上是misleading。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-4-25 19:05:48编辑过]

憧憬

以下是引用jnlvo在2004-4-25 18:43:00的发言：
2. 如果Electra appear accompanied by a commentary in some extant medieval manuscripts,那么Electra就也可属于前10中，这样与原文矛盾。

ten called the “select plays “, are  accompanied in L  by  ancient commentaries and also appear in other medieval manuscripts，属于前10中要两个条件，就算是Electra appear accompanied by a commentary in some extant medieval manuscripts，因为Electra 是没有commentary的，所以也不可能属于前10个啊，这样和原文就不矛盾了啊

番茄炒蛋

marie MM，

第一题搞得地方只是到底这个地方性法规在被定性为全国性法规之后能不能再对地方有约束

原文是说了他们是希望通过请愿把这个禁烟法规全州化

Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction ?”

a中只是另外说了一件事情，有些全国性得法规不一定能够规范地方，也就是说这个禁烟得法规并不能真正得全州化

The state law would not affect existing local ordinances

（注意，这并不是依附于原文而存在得，不要和原文撤在一起）

这样选民在签名得时候就会不知所措，他签名得这个法规呢即使成了全国性得法规也可能根本就不能对其他地方有效力，而他在签名前是被问道

Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction

这不是误导是什么呢？

番茄炒蛋

第二题

请注意原文最后一句

The other eight, which appear in alphabetical order , without commentary , the Electra is one of the alphabeticals.

经过语序调整后变成

the Electra is without commentary

答案是

Eruipides’Electra does not appear accompanied by a commentary in any extant medieval manuscript

这个electra连commentary都没有得，更不用谈a commentary in any extant medieval manuscript了啊

所以这个结论完全可以从原文推导出来，楼上得XDJM有人想得太多了，

dreadpower

    第一题答案是D，讨论过的啊

    见http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardID=24&ID=42063&page=1

睡熊

第一题的答案就是（D）! 同学们，这可不行哪！

mindfree

Q2. The key is "...also appear in other medieval manuscripts". Based on the meaning, we can conclude that the other eight did not appear in other medieval manuscripts. Since L is the only one Electra was and there was no commentary, we can conclude E.

番茄炒蛋

引用bryony在前面讨论中的原话

我选C。因为答案说，州法凌驾与地方法之上。州法又不如地方法严厉。应该不能算extending the local ordiances statewide. 相反应该是diminish the power of local ordiance statewide.
不知道对不对

我觉得这个extending是指执法范围上的延伸，并不一定说是要把法律本身的内容加强或是削弱，请楼上两位大NN再帮我看看在这页上我留的解释，最后一问，不懂也不钻牛角了，呵呵，谢谢先

我觉得投票者被问的情况(禁烟法规全国化)和实际情况（法规对地方可能会没有用）有些矛盾，在明知这些情况的前提，那些起草者还在这样问签名的人，那不就成了误导吗？

红红的云

P1 = In state, cities & towns have their own ordinances

P2 = New petion: name 'Statewide...' with question '...sign for statewide campaign'

P3 = Petition: ban smoking in retail & govern offices open to public.

EC = Petition is misleading to voters on what circumstances, as they understand it is as an local ordinance being extended to statewide

Possible solution: Look out for an option that brings out a local ordinance in place and bring out an element of uncertainity - what will happen to this local ordinance when the new statewide petition/ban is enforced.
Whether the new statewide will go hand in hand with the local or will it supersede it and phase it out.