ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3149|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请问 补充材料 154

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-6-10 03:45:00 | 只看该作者

请问 补充材料 154

In 1933 the rubber, clothing, and shipbuilding
industries put into effect a six-hour workday,
believing it a seeming permanent accommodation
rather than a temporary expedient for what many
observers thought was
an economy made overpro-
ductive by advances in technology.

(A) believing it a seeming permanent accommoda-
tion rather than a temporary expedient for
what many observers thought was
(B) believing it a seeming permanent accommoda-
tion instead of a temporary expedient for
what many observers thought was
(C) believing that it was not a temporary expedient
but a seeming permanent accommodation to
what many observers thought of as a
(D) not as a temporary expedient but as a seem-
ingly permanent accommodation to what
many observers thought was
(E) not as a temporary expedient but believing it a
seemingly permanent accommodation for
what many observers thought

搞不清楚这个句子的后半部分的机构,特别是这部分(把正确答案D插入后):not as a temporary expedient but as a seemingly permanent accommodation to what many observers thought was an economy made overproductive by advances in technology.
请问这里的what从句里面的谓语是什么?是though 还是 was , 我理解 what many observers thought was为插入语:很多观察家思考的那样 但是如果是插入语应该有逗号割开吧。 请各位帮忙解惑。
另外我做这道题的时候,根据 it没有指代对象这点就把A,B,C,E排除了,请问这个依据对不对。
期盼各位解答!
沙发
发表于 2003-6-10 04:14:00 | 只看该作者
FYI

>请问这里的what从句里面的谓语是什么?
thought.
what-clause 作主语,省略一个what引导宾语从句做to的宾语
(what) what many observers thought was sth.

>另外我做这道题的时候,根据 it没有指代对象这点就把A,B,C,E排除了,请问这个依据对不对。

嗬嗬,有点悬。
板凳
发表于 2003-6-10 16:45:00 | 只看该作者
另外我做这道题的时候,根据 it没有指代对象这点就把A,B,C,E排除了,请问这个依据对不对

为什么认为it 没有指代对象?
我认为, it可以指代a six-hour workday.
A,B,错在believe后面不接双宾语.and seeming should be "seemingly"
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-23 14:16
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部