扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2007E1-SC-132
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.
that CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times
that, on average, CEO's now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times
that, on average, CEO's now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio
CEO's who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio
CEO's now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times
还没有题目讲解（毕出老师会陆续发布对官方考题的解读，请保持关注）。
(B) a ratio that compares的compare不能用主动方式表达，应该是被比较sth be compared to…的省略形式（省略了主语和系动词，是惯用法）；compare to的比较对象不对象等，前者表达的是工资数，而后者42 times是比率。
(C) 正确，as compared to比较结构，419 times the pay与42 times their pay比较，the ratio…是同位语。
(D) 缺少that引导宾语从句；indicates CEO's who…句子结构不完整，缺少谓语，who引导定语从句 修饰名词CEO's。
(E) 缺少that引导宾语从句；indicates CEO's earning…句子结构不完整，缺少谓语；compare to的 比较对象不对等，前者表达的是工资数，而后者42 times是 比率
use GRAMMATICAL AND LOGICAL PARALLELISM to determine what 'x' is being compared to. in this case, 'x' is '42 times their pay', which is, grammatically and logically, plainly comparable to "419 times the pay of blue-collar workers".
倍数的比较：A is x times as big as B；A is x-1 times bigger than B；A is/do ……，x times B
as做连词时，表示当……时/由于/像……一样，按照……方式，
C，CEO's earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers now, as compared to 42 times their pay in 1980，as当……时，引导过去分词作状语
- 'the ratio of 42 times' is redundant; it'd be good enough just to say '42 times'. 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 it also breaks parallelism.
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 can't just write "42 times" by itself. it has to be 42 times something. 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.
the construction in choice e doesn't make sense.since that's obviously not the case here——the report points out a fact about these CEOs, not the identities of the CEOs themselves。
as compared to不能说不对，永远不要轻易评判一个固定搭配的对错，如果你不知道的话
B选项的ratio that....，一个用来比较的ratio？有专门用来比较的ratio吗？
语义奇怪
- 'the ratio of 42 times' is redundant; it'd be good enough just to say '42 times'. 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 it also breaks parallelism.
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 can't just write "42 times" by itself. it has to be 42 times something. 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.
the construction in choice e doesn't make sense.since that's obviously not the case here——the report points out a fact about these CEOs, not the identities of the CEOs themselves。
剩下ABC，考点是比较对象是否一致；
A. CEO's earn xxxx 跟 blue-collar workers 比较，排除；
B. ratio 可以跟 42 times 作比较（比率为啥不可以相互作比较啊···不懂），问题在于比率自己不能发出比较这个动作，因此语态有问题；
C. correct （但读起来真的太拗口了····
(B) a ratio that compares的compare不能用主动方式表达，应该是被比较sth be compared to…的省略形式（省略了主语和系动词，是惯用法）；compare to的比较对象不对象等，前者表达的是工资数，而后者42 times是比率。
(C) 正确，as compared to比较结构，419 times the pay与42 times their pay比较，the ratio…是同位语。
(D) 缺少that引导宾语从句；indicates CEO's who…句子结构不完整，缺少谓语，who引导定语从句 修饰名词CEO's。
(E) 缺少that引导宾语从句；indicates CEO's earning…句子结构不完整，缺少谓语；compare to的 比较对象不对等，前者表达的是工资数，而后者42 times是 比率
A compared to的比较对象不对等，前者419 times the pay of blue-collar workers表达的是工资数， 而后者a ratio of是比率。
B compare to只能用被动，比例不可能主动比较
C 觉得也有问题，as copmared to 太奇怪了 差中选优吧"
as compared to是什么鬼
their指的还是1980年那些蓝领？
choice a, 还原 CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than bule-collar workers (do)是可以接受的，但是compared to a ratio of 42 times，比较对象是419 times 和 a ratio
choice b, a ratio作为了419 times的同位语。比较对象依然是a ratio 和42 times。B：ratio不能主动发出compare的动作
choice c, 比较对象是419 times和42 times。correct
choice d,e没有谓语动词
b,times the pay vs. times
d,句子结构不完整
e,句子结构不完整
as compared，当与某物比较时热earn 419倍，这样的表达非常奇怪
【the real problems with choice a: 】 - 'the ratio of 42 times' is redundant; it'd be good enough just to say '42 times'.
42 times their pay
比较主体的一致性
注意对比bc选项的不同点以及为什么要有这些不同
CEO's是CEO的复数（惊了）
c选项419 times the pay和42 times their pay形成对比，the ratio是同位语
其余选项the ratio和pay无法形成比较
A/B: 419 times VS. ratio; D/E: CEO's VS. 42 times/ratio