从完美的have been结构走起
方案推理,取非
比较的题型:1)比两样东西(名词),2)比两个动作(动词)。
这里比较的是两个动作,所以,有一个省略用法 [sub+verb]+modifier,只保留modifier,选C。
如果是比较两个东西, 比如circulation in.... is lower than that in ....,就应该是D。
(newspaper){had} 《lower circulation》 in the six months than(newspaper){ had} in a similar period
改写为两个东西比较:the circulation of newspaper in the six months is lower than that in a similar period
D选项:比较对象虽然是对等的,但是having been based on crashes在本选项中更像是一个伴随状语,用来修饰整个题目的主句。这显然是不符合逻辑的,该部分在逻辑上应修饰company。
会引起歧义
X is second only to Y = only Y can be better than X out of all the options available 排序必定是 No.1 Y No.2 X .....
X is only second to Y = X is second to Y, but may be first, third, or tenth compared to other options available No. a 是 Y No.a+1 X
D中which指代前面的
mandatory restrictions
变成了restrictions包括后面的only three such pollutants from power plants-mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides
意思不对,应该是关于这三方面污染的限制,而不是包含这三方面污染的限制,因为限制的内容不是污染。
前面even if they can并不需要虚拟,因为是事实。所以不能用could afford。【真实条件句,不能用虚拟】
后半句的意思是“假如这些家电放在以前,祖父母会觉得很神奇”,事实上这些家电放在以前是绝对不会发生的情况,所以用past perfect 。【非真实条件句,要用虚拟】
混合虚拟语气!各用各的,所以这样组合是可以的。
1. 不定式和从句的区别
不定式表示的是一种“主观性”,即,表达一种状态的转换(start-stop)。
从句表示的是一种“客观性”,即,表达一种状态的稳定(process)。
expect的约束力较强,应用不定式做宾语
2. 平行触发语rather than/instead of (!)
rather than后面的动词可以是-ing形式,也可以是省略to的不定式形式,即rather than doing或rather than (to) do。
rather than前后的动词形式要保持一致,前面是doing形式则后面也用doing形式,前面是to do形式则后面也用(to) do形式(to可以省略)。
但rather than位于句首时,则只能接不带to 的不定式。比如Rather than throw away the leftovers, John stored it in the refrigerator. 约翰没有扔掉剩菜,而是把它放在冰箱里。
A. be capable of是“有资格的,能够胜任的”的意思, 表达的是其主语主动上有能力做什么事情
B. 放在了动词旁边,成了插入语,因此此时其是状语
C. "形容词+形容词+名词"的修饰结构
(d) and (e) contain a COMMA + -ING modifier that is used incorrectly.
a COMMA + -ING modifier is an adverbial modifier that modifies the entire clause to which it's attached, and is attributed to the subject of that clause.
in this context, you only want to modify the preceding noun ("tribes"), so COMMA + -ING is inappropriate.
2 idiom errors in (b):
* "interact" MUST be paired with "with". "interact between" and "interact among" are unidiomatic.
* "among each other" is unidiomatic (as is "between each other"); you should write "among themselves" or "between themselves". but, again, this doesn't work with "interact" anyway, so the issue is moot here.
Answer A suggests that the manufacturers are making small cars efficient, i.e. they're changing small cars, but in fact they're making small cars that are efficient.
I don't think that pronoun ambiguity is the criterion here.
the sentence is supposed to say that today's small cars are more fuel-efficient than previous small cars -- i.e., OTHER small cars.
this is important, because you can't use a "they"/"their" construction (which would illogically imply that you're talking about the same small cars mentioned in the first part of the sentence).
the use of "those" in (c), on the other hand, accomplishes this distinction nicely.
analogy:
sprinters in texas can run faster than they can in north dakota.
--> illogical; in this sentence, "they" would be taken to mean "sprinters in texas" (i.e., not just sprinters).
sprinters in texas can run faster than those in north dakota.
--> makes sense; "those" = sprinters, in this case.
same thing with "they/their" vs. "those" in these instances.
In general, the point of "that" and "those" is to stand for nouns without any attached modifiers/descriptions.
There's an explicit contrast with "it" and "they", which stand for a noun with all of the attached modifiers.
E.g.,
The government of Country X is more stable than it was two years ago.
"It" = "the government of country X"
It is impossible to use "it" to stand for government in general. In this context, "it" can refer only to the government of country X.
Vs.
The government of Country X is more stable than that of Country Y.
"That" = "the government". NOT the government of country X.
The whole point of comparisons, of course, is to compare two different things. So, these pronouns are extremely useful because they're designed to do exactly that-- to stand for only the parts that are actually the same.
after when" is redundant; you'd just say "after".
"from when" is not redundant. for instance:
You will suffocate 6 minutes from when you enter the cave, unless you come back out for air.
establishing the intended meaning is ALWAYS the FIRST STEP of ANY sentence correction problem!
without the intended meaning, most splits are actually impossible to decide, since the vast majority of grammar rules just serve to specify the meaning of whatever construction.
B and D - Incorrect because they do not include the "he" in the end. Without this subject, the rest of the sentence doesn't make much sense.
C - Incorrect because the primary clause is just a fragment:
* Remove the parenthetical phrases "even though...telescope", and "in 1609" and you will see that C is missing a verb as it reads: "Gallileo on hearing that such an optical instrument had been made, he quickly built his own"
E - Incorrect because of the double negative "Even though...but when he heard". Double negatives are a no-no on the test.
C, D, and E - Incorrect because "even though" is not appropriate in this case as it isn't consistent with the intended meaning of the sentence. "Even though" should be used to show mitigating circumstances, or to introduce a paradox as in the examples below:
it's an adverbial modifier that modifies the action of the clause with which it's associated. technically, that action is encapsulated by "is (able)", although it's probably easier to think of it as "modifying the entire clause".
with modifiers that serve as adjectives (such as "..., which ..."), it's crucial that you isolate the single noun modified by the modifier.
on the other hand, with adverbial modifiers, it's unimportant to isolate the single word being modified, because the placement of the modifier isn't restricted anywhere near as severely as with adjective-type modifiers.
as stated above, "dependent" is an adjective, modifies the tree. "depending" is a participle (which introduces an adverbial modifier that modifies the action of the clause, rather than modifying a noun).
the problem lies in the different meanings of the 2 words. "dependent" refers to reliance on another for some kind of support (as in "my children are dependent on me for their food and shelter"). so not only is that choice sketchy in terms of grammar, but its meaning is also all kinds of wrong: it makes no sense to say that a tree is "dependent" on its size (does its size provide it with food or water? etc)
e的问题在于应该是capable of doing