GWD Set 1 T7

尘未

A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.




A.      that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times   工资比ratio  

B.      that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times              pay是ratio？

C.       that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio         compare前后一致正确。

D.      CEO’s who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio   宾从无that；宾从的从句不是一个句子；compare前后一致

E .  CEO’s now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times            宾从无that  ；工资比ratio

zxkingsey

A recent review of pay scales indicates thatCEO’snow earn 419 timesthe pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to42 timestheir pay, the ratio in 1980.
颜色相同表示对等，那419和42比较，the ratio指代42 times

B    that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 timesthe pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times in 1980. 这里的ratio是只419，是对419进行限制，句子成分发生变化

leosnoon

这个解释比较让人信服：

Cite from www.manhattangmat.com

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.

more generally, when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave 'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height of the sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty - but you can't use empty space.

choice c exhibits proper usage of 'times' followed by their pay. it also uses the ratio, a correct identification of exactly what is being described.

martycai

这个解释比较让人信服：

Cite from www.manhattangmat.com

choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to say that, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratio reached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.

more generally, when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave 'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height of the sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty - but you can't use empty space.

choice c exhibits proper usage of 'times' followed by their pay. it also uses the ratio, a correct identification of exactly what is being described.

-- by 会员 leosnoon (2010/5/31 18:53:54)

貌似没听过这个manhattangmat.com以及他的语法。。。不知道靠不靠谱

林若绮

A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.

A.    that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times  
B.    that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times  
C.    that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio      

D.    CEO’s who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio  
E.    CEO’s now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times


根据宾语从句，直接排除DE；
选项A（", compared" 修饰主语CEO'S, not paralleled to a ratio)
选项B  (a ratio should be "compared" )
选项C 为正确选项   ( 插入 "as" 为句子间的比较；省略了相同的"S+V+O"，而compared to 42 times在这里做被省略"O”的定语， "their pay" refers to "the pay of blue-collar workers")

zkylby

看完这13页··我还是对答案一知半解 ···

我觉得
B a ratio修饰的是the pay,不对称
while C 没有这个问题

SO C

lavinliu

选项里面只有C是将“419 times the pay” of blue-collar workers和“42 times their pay”正确比较了的，虽然as的结构和their可能产生歧义，但是相比其他选项的对比不平行来说，这个选项是最好的。矮子里拔将军

Vivian1091

DE根据that排除，AB的错误，从曼哈顿上摘的，大概翻译了一下：

*****B的错误：1，语义错误，B的意思貌似是说在 42种不同的情况中in1980，CEO:蓝领的ratio达到了419:1.这句话表意是错的，不过说实话我自己做题的时候看不出来；2，也就是语法上的错误，我们不能把 42times单独放在那里，让他“悬垂”起来，42times 这种结构 后面必须有东西，比如我们常用的结构42 times that in 1990，这点我们应该牢记，是一个绝对的错误点。B选项中42 times后面直接跟了一个 介词短语，让42 times悬垂起来了，所以不对。

别看这个题短小精悍，亮点还挺多的。choice b is badly worded: 'compares to 42 times in 1980' seems to saythat, on forty-two different occasions in 1980, the ceo:blue-collar ratioreached 419:1. this is not what we are trying to say.

more generally, when speaking about ratios as is done here, you cannot leave'times' hanging like this. sometimes you can use pronouns - the height ofthe sears tower is more than four times that of the statue of liberty- but you can't use empty space.

choice c exhibits proper usage of 'times' followed by their pay. it alsouses the ratio, a correct identification of exactly what is beingdescribed.

youcan't just write "42 times" by itself. ithas to be 42 times something.
if it's 42 times something that was mentioned previously, or 42 times somethingthat is in parallel structure to something that was mentioned previously, thenyou could use a relative pronoun (i.e., something like "42 times thatin 1990", etc).

but you can't just leave "42 times" hanging out alone.

*****A的错误：A从语法上来讲是OK的，没有绝对性错误。但是 the ration of 42 times是 赘余的。note that ，ratio在C,D中做同位语的时候不是多余的。

l  yeah, i think you're right: the comparison made in choice a is ok. it's notquite as ideally worded as the comparison in choices b-c-d, but, as can be seenin saurabh's ron/bush example, it's fine.

the real problems with choice a:
- 'the ratio of 42 times' is redundant; it'd be good enough just to say '42times'. note that the word 'ratio' is not redundant in choices c-d,since it's being used as a modifier to make a logical connection.
- it doesn't say 42 times what. not only is that unacceptably vague, but italso breaks parallelism.

Hendy

philikittist 发表于 2004-7-13 19:40
1 DE是名词，把句子改写成名词，句子的重心由event变成sb，必错。2 on average和 average pay的问题：前者 ...

感觉都没说到考点上

Hendy

rhod 发表于 2004-8-3 13:12
要用compare with 不能用compare to 啊前面忘了说，这点也是同感。

GMAT不区分这两个考点，楼上是白勇语法看的吧