扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2008E1-SC-174
Often major economic shifts are so gradual as to be indistinguishable at first from ordinary fluctuations in the financial markets.
so gradual as to be indistinguishable
so gradual so that they can be indistinguishable
so gradual that they are unable to be distinguished
gradual enough not to be distinguishable
gradual enough so that one cannot distinguish them
题目分析：
本题难度主要存在于选项(A)和选项(C)的判断。这里总结一下关于so as to和so that在字面上的区别。so…that可以用作多个主语时，so前面的主语和that后面的主语可以不一样，例如：
I set up the computer so that they could work from home.（我把电脑设置好，这样他们就可以在家办公了。）
so as to要求so前的主语和as to身后动作的主语相同。例如：
I set up the computer so as to do my work. （我把电脑设置好以便完成我的工作）
此时，do my work的主语必须是I。
选项分析：
A选项：Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。
B选项：想表达因果关系时，要么说so…that…，要么只说so，而不能用so…so that。
C选项：本选项在语法上没有问题。但在逻辑上，应将so gradual that改为so gradual as to be。这点考查了不定式和从句的区别。用之于本题，由于变化部分是状语，所以需判断主句的发生对状语事件的发生与否是否有直接影响。显然地，主句“主要经济变化是如此的逐渐”这个事件会直接影响“主要经济变化不能在最开始被检测出来”这个事件的发生与否。显然地，经济变化只要具有逐渐这个特点，则其就会具有难以被检测这个特点。因此，只能用不定式短语。
D选项：enough表示“足以”，不能展现出主句和从句的因果关系。
E选项：enough和so…that…是重复的，不能同时出现。
(b) "so gradual so that..." is not a correct idiom. instead you should say "so gradual that..."
(c) is substantially more wordy than the correct answer (a).
i don't see anything strictly ungrammatical in (c).
as i said upthread, i don't see anything ungrammatical about choice (c), so i don't think splitting is going to do you any good here.
the only difference i see between (a) and (c) is a somewhat substantial difference in wordiness / concision. (i.e., "unable to be distinguished" is 4 words that mean the exact same thing as the 1 word "indistinguishable")
i also find something a bit awkward about the use of "unable" to describe something that's not actually an inability of the subject. here's what i mean:
this plant is unable to perform photosynthesis.
legitimate, because this actually describes an inability of the plant itself.
this sentence:
they (= major economic shifts) are unable to be distinguished...
i don't like this, because we're not actually talking about an "inability" possessed by the economic shifts themselves.
if we'd said something like "economic shifts are unable to destroy your equity", then i'd find that more appealing.
(e) is unidiomatic. you can't mix "enough" and "so that".
the correct idiom is "enough to...". you can't "double up" with another idiom.
as for (d), i'm not sure whether you're allowed to insert "not" between "enough" and "to".
i don't think that you are.
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论