扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2008E1-SC-247
Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less, get better gas mileage, allow passengers to get in and out more easily, and have a smoother ride.
Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, they cost less,
Minivans carry as many as seven passengers, in comparison with most sport utility vehicles, and have a lower cost, they
Minivans, carrying as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles the cost is lower, and they
题目分析：
略。
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：Minivan和they双重主语，一句话中不能有两个主语；过去分词短语compared with most sport utility vehicles做定语会就近修饰名词seven passengers，造成了比较对象不对等。
C选项：并列连词and身后拥有两个主谓宾结构，即，have a lower cost和they get better gas mileage。
D选项：分词短语carrying as many as seven passengers是伴随状语，即，是主句cost的状语。但在逻辑上，“能坐七个人”和“花费少”属于Minivans的两个方面，之间没有互相修饰关系，应该是并列关系，即，carry事件需和cost事件具有并列关系。
E选项：并列连词and身前有两个主语，即，Minivans和the cost。
I don't know the terms "restrictive" and "non-restrictive", so I'll just give you a bunch of examples.
In general, the idea is this: Modifiers blocked off by commas don't narrow down possibilities; they just give additional descriptive information. Modifiers not blocked off by commas generally do narrow down possibilities.
--
John, running to catch the bus, slipped on the icy pavement and fell.
--> It would be nonsense to take away the commas, because "John" -- who is just one person -- is impossible to narrow down.
--> "Running to catch the bus" describes John.
--> Importantly, "running to catch the bus" is related to the action of the sentence. (John was running when he slipped and fell.)
--
If this kind of relationship doesn't exist, the __ing modifier is inappropriate.
*Jesse, standing almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> Nonsense, because a height difference has no relationship to the fact that we are brothers.
--
"Which"/"who"/"whom"/"whose" implies no such relationship.
Jesse, who stands almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> This sentence is fine.
Looking at the examples above -- especially the first two -- you should be able to tell what's wrong with "carrying...". The biggest problem is the complete lack of any relationship between this capacity and the other ideas that follow (gas mileage, smooth ride, etc.)
B双主语
C run on
错选D carring做伴随状语修饰主句动词，不合理。他们之间没有从属关系，是并列关系
E 前面不是完整句子"
可以解释一下，为什么第一个and是必要的吗？谢谢。登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
2.平行，从后面的, and have可以看出，前面动词应该都是平行的，没有and才对，CE错
3.修饰词，carrying 修饰名词，是错的。D错
D选项：分词短语carrying as many as seven passengers是伴随状语，即，是主句cost的状语。但在逻辑上，“能坐七个人”和“花费少”属于Minivans的两个方面，之间没有互相修饰关系，应该是并列关系，即，carry事件需和cost事件具有并列关系。
C：逗号不能连接两个完整句子。
D：carrying表示伴随修饰，意味着minivan的优点只有伴随着满载七个人的时候才会发生，事实上两个部分是并列关系。
E：and表示两者之间为独立并列关系，事实上and之后的部分都是对minivan和其他车型比较的优点的陈述。
C ，they前应该有分号或者连词并列前面
或者说。并列连词and身后拥有两个主谓宾结构，即，have a lower cost和they get better gas mileage。
D。主谓隔着两个修饰语，第二个修饰语可能修饰第一个修饰语中的词，有歧义，不好
E：and表示两者之间为独立并列关系，事实上and之后的部分都是对minivan和其他车型比较的优点的陈述。
C：逗号不能连接两个完整句子。
D：carrying表示伴随修饰，意味着minivan的优点只有伴随着满载七个人的时候才会发生，事实上两个部分是并列关系。
E：and表示两者之间为独立并列关系，事实上and之后的部分都是对minivan和其他车型比较的优点的陈述。