gwd 8-11,41

mars_cheung

41 选B。不光是 amount 的问题。更主要是 there are fewer than one-quarter of that amount 句子里面比较的对象不正确。 我认为 there are 指的是一个具体的事物，而不是一个数字，而 one-quarter of that amount（number）指的是一个数字。一个复数对象和一个数字比是不可比的。你可以将 1000 个人和 4000（这个数字）的四分之一比吗？显然逻辑不对等。

有人质疑答案 B 里面 as many 是as many as... 的省略，由此根据 fewer than和 as many 不能连用而否决 B。但我查了一下，as many 只是一个副词，并非 as many as 结构的省略。感觉使用上跟 as well, as good 类似——放到句末，表程度而已。类似的用法有 twice as many. 甚至我觉得这个as many 可以不翻译。

OG 和大全上只有少量 as well 的例子，而 as good,  as many 的例子只有网上才有。我觉得以上的用法当 idiom 记好了。

请NN继续讨论啊
        

redhat158

a circumstance 可以修飾整句當同位?

redhat158

九天仙女

新PREP？我CD上下载的prep的详解都找不到这2个题，是不是那个详解落后了？

songgigi

选 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

When drive-ins were at the height of their popularity in the late 1950’s, some 4,000 existed in the United States, today, there are fewer than one quarter as many (drive-ins as there were at the height of their popularity in the late 1950s).
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/when-drive-ins-were-at-the-height-of-their-popularity-in-the-t6550.html

purple_soul_m

8-Q11题虽然可以用排除法得到A，
但看了讨论还是觉得没人能把A的正确性说明白：

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.



tianwan大侠引用了大全171题，确实是个很相似的例子：

171, Because young children do not organize their attention or perceptions systematically, as adults do，they may notice and remember details that their elders ignore.

但两者相比，GWD的这题还是有些模糊：

1）
代词的指代:

171:从句中已经出现their，指代children，所以主句中的they必然也指代children

8-Q11 their在句子很后面出现，
前面又有N个复数名词，
我能想到的一个解释就是， as there are for cod and haddock，看作插入语，所以代词指代不需要考虑这个cod 和haddock。

但legal limits这个表语和 monkfish这个介宾，
在代词指代上孰先孰后，似乎只有从逻辑上判断了

2）平行对称：

171：不存在平行的问题

8-Q11：

选项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.

排除的原因在于which不能指代句子，在G中是必杀的错误。另外还有网友指出，C不平行， but not for 与前面不平行。
我也是这样认为的。
但反过来看A，是不是也不那么完美的平行那，还是说省略了太多的成分，以至于看上去不平行？

There are no legal limits, as there are（limits）
for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

for和on 就不平行，
但如果把句子全部补出，似乎真的太罗嗦：

There are no legal limits, as there are（limits on the size）
for cod and haddock(that can be caught), on the size
           of monkfish
           that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.



前人已经为我们留下了丰富的资源，但在这道题目上似乎没有一个让人信服的定论。

还请后来者多多讨论。

-- by 会员 dingxiang (2008/7/24 11:40:00)

前人种树，后人乘凉，dingxiang 的回答非常在理，谢谢！

此外，这个代词指代真是模糊。究竟只能是指主宾，还是在逻辑语义通顺的情况下也可以指代介宾中的名词呢？！！