D选项：an obstacle to congressional passage变成了the concern的同位语。但显然地，concern并非本身就是an obstacle，而是美国立法者将concern声明为一个障碍，即，obstacle必须作为宾语的补足语。

呀 这个坑没看出来 the concern后置同位语过长引起倒装！

(e) the problem with (e) is"it". it's not ambiguous, though; it actually doesn't refer to anything at all. there's no noun in there, anywhere, to which "it" can refer.
("Ambiguous", in reference to pronouns, is used to refer to a pronoun that has 2 or more possible antecedents, not to refer to a noun that has no possible antecedent.)

划线部分身后的同位语从句that the bank's loans will help foreign producers compete with American businesses应该修饰的对象是concern，即，是担心贷款帮助了外国的商业。因此，该同位语从句应直接放在concern身后，不能放在passage身后。

"being" in (a) is not only unnecessary, but also not used idiomatically.

in general, "being" can be used in some instances where you're talking about X (specific) being a Y (general).
for instance, jake did not enjoy being a graduate student.
notice that the GENERAL category - graduate student - follows "being". the SPECIFIC (jake) doesn't.
you can't do this in reverse.
this choice tries to use the specific (the particular concern) after "being", rather than the general category (an obstacle to congressional passage). regardless of whether the usage of "being" is appropriate otherwise (which, here, it isn't anyway), you can't do that.

(b) breaks up "a concern" from "that the bank’s loans will help...". once that modifier is divorced from "a concern", it is no longer clear exactly what is the concern.
also, "a concern" is problematic. since the sentence cites one very specific concern, it should say "the concern".

(d) first, there's a change in meaning by setting "an obstacle to congressional passage" off in commas. It makes it a nonessential modifier, but this fact is necessary to the meaning of the sentence. the core of that clause becomes "legislators cite the concern" and we lose the important "as an obstacle" piece.

second -- look at the placement of the modifiers.
"that the bank's loans with..." should immediately follow "the concern", since that is what it modifies.
similarly, "as an obstacle..." should be as close as possible to "cite", because that's what it modifies.

in the correct answer, both of these modifiers are placed immediately next to the things that they're supposed to modify; in (d), both constructions are needlessly separated.
(e) the problem with (e) is"it". it's not ambiguous, though; it actually doesn't refer to anything at all. there's no noun in there, anywhere, to which "it" can refer.
("Ambiguous", in reference to pronouns, is used to refer to a pronoun that has 2 or more possible antecedents, not to refer to a noun that has no possible antecedent.)

A选项：分词短语being concern that the bank's loans will help foreign producers compete with American businesses只能做congressional passage的定语，但是本题的意思是美国国会声明（cite）一个担心，而不是声明一个障碍。
D选项：an obstacle to congressional passage变成了the concern的同位语。但显然地，concern并非本身就是an obstacle，而是美国立法者将concern声明为一个障碍，即，obstacle必须作为宾语的补足语。

B选项：划线部分身后的同位语从句that the bank's loans will help foreign producers compete with American businesses应该修饰的对象是concern，即，是担心贷款帮助了外国的商业。因此，该同位语从句应直接放在concern身后，不能放在passage身后。

cite the concern as an obstacle for Congress to pass，
=cite the concern as an obstacle (THAT) for Congress to pass
for Congress to pass实际是省略了that的定语从句修饰obstacle，that在从句中充当成分，所以不能再接it

In choice D, "an obstacle..." is a modifier of "the concern".
As a result, choice D implies that the concern IS an obstacle.
E it没有指代对象

look at the placement of the modifiers.
"that the bank's loans with..." should immediately follow "the concern", since that is what it modifies.
similarly, "as an obstacle..." should be as close as possible to "cite", because that's what it modifies.

in the correct answer, both of these modifiers are placed immediately next to the things that they're supposed to modify; in (d), both constructions are needlessly separated.

e中it指代不清

m

United States legislators cite the concern as an obstacle to congressional passage.
意思是，美国立法者声称这个担心是国会通过的一个障碍。

Cite a as b 把A看做B--Cite as b a

抽象性名词做同位语时，要求被同位的内容与该抽象性名词有直接的关系，即被同位部分=该先行词。
E.g:
Wrong：Spider looks like crab, a suggestion that they belong to a same species.
二者长得像，这是一个事实或现象，而不是一个提议，suggestion改成fact或phenomenon
Right：Spider looks like crab, suggesting that they belong to a same species.
Right：James voiced the idea of going out for pizza, a suggestion that was well received by his hungry friends.
D，并不是担忧本身是国会通过法案的障碍，而是立法者认为它是一个障碍（cite……as……），用同位语是不合适的。

倒装是能看懂 但是理解不了题意

D 为什么不能理解为一个插入语，然后定语直接修饰concern呢？

mark
1. cite A as B - 可以有这个用法，引用A作为B，而不仅是cite A + 句子。从而判断动词是不是存在倒装
2. D里面语义有问题，cite A, B. B作为A的同位语，描述了同一个object，不符合语义。

mark Cite a as b 把A作为B--Cite as b a

if you say "these people have cited (as a Y) (X)" -- or, equivalently, "these people have cited X as a Y" -- then it's not an objective fact that X is a Y; that's just what these people are saying.
on the other hand, if you say "these people have cited X, a Y", then that sentence carries the meaning that it is an objective fact that X is a Y.