OG13总结_百度文库
两大类热门资源免费畅读
续费一年阅读会员，立省24元！
上传于||暂无简介
阅读已结束，如果下载本文需要使用
想免费下载本文？
下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便
还剩12页未读，继续阅读
你可能喜欢ChaseDream版权声明后使用快捷导航没有帐号？
查看: 8815|回复: 388
在线时间 小时
自己打了一次SC的句子，然后想校对一下有没有错的，就在坛子里下了“”同学整理的版本，然后发现他的整理中“7,12,15,34,47,68,83,99”有些小问题，“7“和”47”是答案打错了，其他是一些很小的问题，也改正了自己的一些问题，所以还是占用一些论坛资源再发个帖，可能还是会有些错误，请大家指正。这里只用这样一句话~（‘。')~
本帖子中包含更多资源
才可以下载或查看，没有帐号？
在线时间 小时
谢谢~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
在线时间 小时
gooddddddddddddddd
在线时间 小时
不辞辛劳啊 LZ这个真是很棒啊！
在线时间 小时
在线时间 小时
eill4444 发表于
不辞辛劳啊 LZ这个真是很棒啊！
啊啊啊，谢谢啊
在线时间 小时
语法为神马那么难
在线时间 小时
thanks for sharing
在线时间 小时
thank you very much
在线时间 小时
所属分类: GMAT考试
正在浏览此版块的会员 ()
ChaseDream 论坛
All Rights Reserved.后使用快捷导航没有帐号？
查看: 7851|回复: 22
在线时间 小时
9. In 1979 lack of rain reduced India’s rice productionto about 41 million tons, nearly 25 percentless than those of the 1978 harvest.(A) less than those of the 1978 harvest(B) less than the 1978 harvest(C) less than 1978(D) fewer than 1978(E) fewer than that of India’s 1978 harvest看过了其它的帖子，又看了几遍OG的解释还是不理解：1）为什么不能比较tons,而一定要比较rice production呢？2）在nearly 25 percent less than those of the 1978harvest 前面到底省略了什么？是which is 还是which are还是。。。?3）A中解释说those 应该指代tons,如果those指代tons，OG上为什么没有提less应该改成fewer的错误，而仅仅只说有语义重复的问题呢？4）解释上说的think of 41 million tons of rice as the collective equivalent of the 1979 harvest 到底包含了什么含义？求NN们指导~~
在线时间 小时
在线时间 小时
在线时间 小时
在线时间 小时
9. In 1979 lack of rain reduced India’s rice production to about 41 million tons, nearly 25 percent less than those of the 1978 harvest.(A) less than those of the 1978 harvest(B) less than the 1978 harvest(C) less than 1978(D) fewer than 1978(E) fewer than that of India’s 1978 harvest看过了其它的帖子，又看了几遍OG的解释还是不理解：1）为什么不能比较tons,而一定要比较rice production呢？2）在nearly 25 percent less than those of the 1978harvest 前面到底省略了什么？是which is 还是which are还是。。。?3）A中解释说those 应该指代tons,如果those指代tons，OG上为什么没有提less应该改成fewer的错误，而仅仅只说有语义重复的问题呢？4）解释上说的think of 41 million tons of rice as the collective equivalent of the 1979 harvest 到底包含了什么含义？求NN们指导~~-- by 会员 yiqing2012 ( 21:47:01)
tricky questionSo,here u get the split between fewer and lesscountable nouns vs. uncountable nouns.also that vs thosethat of /those ofyou should understand that if you use structure such as that of/ those of . you should have a similar structure in the former part to let the sentence parallel and also to let us understand what that or those refers tosince there is no& noun of ..... structure& present in the former part, such structure should be outalso, if you don't understand this technique, even that those can be point to tonshow can u use less for comparison between countable nounsthe same applies to that (production ) & &fewer cannot introduce comparison between uncountable nouns&nearly 25 percent less than those of the 1978harvest & is a adverbial modifier , modifies the preceding clauseyou can further post your questions if I omit some points you ask here
在线时间 小时
OG上的解释感觉并没有否定that/those of 因为前面没有类似的结构所以不对，而是因为that/those的指代会和harvest引发语义重复。以A选项为例，OG的解释是：This version exhibits redundant word choice. The pronoun those refers to the tons of the 1978 harvest. Both harvests are measured in tons, and it is clearer and simpler to compare with the harvest itself, not with the tons of the harvest. 所以我才会问，如果those指代了tons，为什么不提less的错误呢？是不是会和：“think of 41 million tons of rice as the collective equivalent of the 1979 harvest ”的解释有关系？而E选项中，OG的解释是：Since the comparative adjective should refer to rice production, fewer is not appropriate. Furthermore, the pronounthat refers back to India’s rice production [fewer than the rice production of India’s 1978 harvest] and is redundant. The word harvest is sufficient here to express the comparison. &是不是由于语义上和年份更相关的应该是该年份的产量，而不是该年份的吨数，所以推出比较的对象是production而不是tons?
在线时间 小时
OG上的解释感觉并没有否定that/those of 因为前面没有类似的结构所以不对，而是因为that/those的指代会和harvest引发语义重复。以A选项为例，OG的解释是：This version exhibits redundant word choice. The pronoun those refers to the tons of the 1978 harvest. Both harvests are measured in tons, and it is clearer and simpler to compare with the harvest itself, not with the tons of the harvest. 所以我才会问，如果those指代了tons，为什么不提less的错误呢？是不是会和：“think of 41 million tons of rice as the collective equivalent of the 1979 harvest ”的解释有关系？而E选项中，OG的解释是：Since the comparative adjective should refer to rice production, fewer is not appropriate. Furthermore, the pronounthat refers back to India’s rice production [fewer than the rice production of India’s 1978 harvest] and is redundant. The word harvest is sufficient here to express the comparison. &是不是由于语义上和年份更相关的应该是该年份的产量，而不是该年份的吨数，所以推出比较的对象是production而不是tons?-- by 会员 yiqing2012 ( 23:10:38)
OG解释的人也不是神他们也是人他们分析错误不见得会全部分析出来，就像OG12的解释他们也漏掉很多东西1+1=3， OG的解释是说1+1=2所以之前的等式是错的1+2=3，这个也可能证明之前的等式是错的殊途同归我可以很确定的告诉你这里的those不能指代到之前的tons，理由就是我之前说的在几乎所有的those/that of引导的比较问题，OG的选项前面都会有个与that/those of对称的结构来认为that/those是指代 noun/nouns of中的noun/nouns
在线时间 小时
额。。。。LZ见过哪道题有比较吨和kg，厘米和米的吗？？？这种计量单位有比较的意义吗？？？？只有实词有意义的词汇才有比较的可能。。。。对于A选项，og的解释实际上是说，原句主要想表达1979年的production和1978年的harvest相比减少了25%，但是这里those指代41 million tons，那么就变成了产量和41 million tons比，不合理——那还有必要再说fewer的问题吗？？源头都错误了，修饰成分还用再纠结吗？对于E选项，形容词使用错误，fewer指代可数名词，而production是不可数名词；that of是冗余的，意思为india‘s 1978年产量的产量
在线时间 小时
LZ还是从语义来看，如果能想通是比较production和harvest，其他估计问题就不大了。。。。
在线时间 小时
OG上的解释感觉并没有否定that/those of 因为前面没有类似的结构所以不对，而是因为that/those的指代会和harvest引发语义重复。以A选项为例，OG的解释是：This version exhibits redundant word choice. The pronoun those refers to the tons of the 1978 harvest. Both harvests are measured in tons, and it is clearer and simpler to compare with the harvest itself, not with the tons of the harvest. 所以我才会问，如果those指代了tons，为什么不提less的错误呢？是不是会和：“think of 41 million tons of rice as the collective equivalent of the 1979 harvest ”的解释有关系？而E选项中，OG的解释是：Since the comparative adjective should refer to rice production, fewer is not appropriate. Furthermore, the pronounthat refers back to India’s rice production [fewer than the rice production of India’s 1978 harvest] and is redundant. The word harvest is sufficient here to express the comparison. &是不是由于语义上和年份更相关的应该是该年份的产量，而不是该年份的吨数，所以推出比较的对象是production而不是tons?-- by 会员 yiqing2012 ( 23:10:38)
OG解释的人也不是神他们也是人他们分析错误不见得会全部分析出来，就像OG12的解释他们也漏掉很多东西1+1=3， OG的解释是说1+1=2所以之前的等式是错的1+2=3，这个也可能证明之前的等式是错的殊途同归我可以很确定的告诉你这里的those不能指代到之前的tons，理由就是我之前说的在几乎所有的those/that of引导的比较问题，OG的选项前面都会有个与that/those of对称的结构来认为that/those是指代 noun/nouns of中的noun/nouns-- by 会员 DUKB24 ( 23:16:50)
thks a lot~~ &我最近刷第三遍OG的时候非常苦恼，因为发现了很多OG解释里没有提到的问题，而且很多问题论坛上也木有人讨论过，所以不知道对错。。。可不可以再问一个问题啊~因为每次你回答的都比较清楚而且有说服力~：4. At the end of the 1930s, Duke Ellington was looking for a composer to assist him—someone not only who could arrange music for his successful big band, but mirroring his eccentric writing style as well in order to finishthe many pieces he had started but never completed.(A) someone not only who could arrange music for his successful big band, but mirroring his eccentric writing style as well in order to finish(B) someone who could not only arrange music for his successful big band, but also mirror his eccentric writing style in order to finish(C) someone who not only could arrange music for his successful big band, but also to mirror his eccentric writing style in finishing(D) that being someone who could not only arrange music for his successful big band, but mirroring his eccentric writing style for finishing(E) being someone not only who could arrange music for his successful big band, but mirror his eccentric writing style as well, finishing答案很清楚，但是对于D的解释：Instead of the shorter and clearersomeone who, this version uses the longer phrasethat being someone who, which is overly wordy. Furthermore, the verbs are not in the same form and so the construction is unparallel. Finally, the best way to express the causal relationship between the composer’s qualities and finishing Ellington’s pieces is to use the conjunctionin order to.that being 结构肯定不对，但解释没有说that的指代问题，好像默认指代了composer,而不是him,这里的that可以跳跃to assist him 来修饰composer吗(因为我只知道that的跳跃修饰最大只能跳跃介词短语)？同理，同位语跳跃的修饰中也可以跳跃to do？Instead of the shorter and clearersomeone who, this version uses the longer phrasethat being someone who, which is overly wordy. Furthermore, the verbs are not in the same form and so the construction is unparallel. Finally, the best way to express the causal relationship between the composer’s qualities and finishing Ellington’s pieces is to use the conjunctionin order to.that being 结构肯定不对，但解释没有说that的指代问题，好像默认指代了composer,而不是him,这里的that可以跳跃to assist him 来修饰composer吗(因为我只知道that的跳跃修饰最大只能跳跃介词短语)？同理，同位语跳跃的修饰中也可以跳跃to do？
所属分类: GMAT考试
正在浏览此版块的会员 ()
ChaseDream 论坛
All Rights Reserved.后使用快捷导航没有帐号？
查看: 6441|回复: 20
在线时间 小时
65. (新题)Digging in sediments in northern China, evidence hasbeen gathered by scientists suggesting that complexlife-forms emerged much earlier than they hadpreviously thought.(A) evidence has been gathered by scientistssuggesting that complex life-forms emergedmuch earlier than they had(B) evidence gathered by scientists suggests amuch earlier emergence of complex life-formsthan had been(C) scientists have gathered evidence suggestingthat complex life-forms emerged much earlierthan(D) scientists have gathered evidence that suggestsa much earlier emergence of complex life-formsthan that which was(E) scientists have gathered evidence whichsuggests a much earlier emergence of complexlife-forms than that正确答案是C没什么问题，但是OG上说A项Furthermore,the dependent clause startingwith suggestingmay be construed with either the evidenceor the scientists, which makes this versionunnecessarily ambiguous.但是A项中主句已经是完成时，suggesting只能是scientists的定语啊，为什么OG还这么说呢？
在线时间 小时
在线时间 小时
我的个人理解如下：原句可以补充成evidence which has been gathered by scientists suggesting, 如果这样的话这个suggesting的确是混淆的，因为既可以做evidence的定语 又可就近做scientists的定语。究其原因就是如果按A的写法，属于一个非限制性定语从句，A中的which既然可以省略，则定语suggesting就没有特定的修饰对象，既可以是evidence又可是scientists。所以OG应该是正确的。 再啰嗦一下，GMAT考试中最最忌讳的就是从句+谓语+从句的形式，选择A的话明显就是违背了GMAT SC考试的原则。所以不用纠结哈。
在线时间 小时
而且，要区分开句子语法正确性和逻辑正确性，GMAT SC看重的是句子在保证逻辑正确的情况下，语法正确且句子简练。也就是说，这道题的A，从语法上的正确性上看，suggesting是修饰scientists并没有问题；但是从逻辑正确性上看，suggesting理应修饰的是evidence(只有它才能suggest)，因此会存在混淆歧义。
在线时间 小时
我的个人理解如下：原句可以补充成evidence which has been gathered by scientists suggesting, 如果这样的话这个suggesting的确是混淆的，因为既可以做evidence的定语 又可就近做scientists的定语。究其原因就是如果按A的写法，属于一个非限制性定语从句，A中的which既然可以省略，则定语suggesting就没有特定的修饰对象，既可以是evidence又可是scientists。所以OG应该是正确的。 再啰嗦一下，GMAT考试中最最忌讳的就是从句+谓语+从句的形式，选择A的话明显就是违背了GMAT SC考试的原则。所以不用纠结哈。-- by 会员 nikizy ( 16:23:39)
看了superbat的回复，明白了，原句说evidence has been gathered，就说明已经完成了，所以suggesting就不可能做evidence的伴随（prep08上说的完成时不能伴随），不过还是谢谢你啦
在线时间 小时
而且，要区分开句子语法正确性和逻辑正确性，GMAT SC看重的是句子在保证逻辑正确的情况下，语法正确且句子简练。也就是说，这道题的A，从语法上的正确性上看，suggesting是修饰scientists并没有问题；但是从逻辑正确性上看，suggesting理应修饰的是evidence(只有它才能suggest)，因此会存在混淆歧义。-- by 会员 superbat28 ( 16:58:29)
茅塞顿开，谢啦还有一题求教，拜托啦
在线时间 小时
还想问一下这道题的C(C) scientists have gathered evidence suggestingthat complex life-forms emerged much earlierthan这里的比较对象对等么？求NN指点啊~
在线时间 小时
还想问一下这道题的C(C) scientists have gathered evidence suggestingthat complex life-forms emerged much earlierthan这里的比较对象对等么？求NN指点啊~-- by 会员 琛angela ( 21:28:26)
你可以把这个情况当成 比较情形 的一个特殊情况来记。 它更等同于【同一事物在不同时期不同状态的比较】Something is much earlier/ easier than sb. previously believed/ thought. 这是一种约定俗成的比较表达方式。
在线时间 小时
还想问一下这道题的C(C) scientists have gathered evidence suggestingthat complex life-forms emerged much earlierthan这里的比较对象对等么？求NN指点啊~-- by 会员 琛angela ( 21:28:26)
你可以把这个情况当成 比较情形 的一个特殊情况来记。 它更等同于【同一事物在不同时期不同状态的比较】Something is much earlier/ easier than sb. previously believed/ thought. 这是一种约定俗成的比较表达方式。-- by 会员 superbat28 ( 12:00:23)
这道题里最后将they省略，有什么原则可循吗，谢啦bat大大
在线时间 小时
弱弱地问下，C选项的suggesting就近修饰evidence，能改成suggested吗，因为前面是现在完成时
所属分类: GMAT考试
正在浏览此版块的会员 ()
ChaseDream 论坛
All Rights Reserved.}