[問題]GWD3-Q34

[reohuang]

這裡的but應該是跟前面的not v1 but v2的為一組吧
之所以會變成run-on是因為整句變為:

s v1, do not v2 but v3. 前後兩句話沒有連接

open to discuss~

[agustin]

C流水句 上面說過了
我另補充一個
行文方向

do very little impulse shopping(行文方向是不買),
do not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball(行文方向是不買 與前句一致),
but(轉折語 行文方向改變) leave with only a basketball (可是這邊的內容 行文方向還是不買...)

用了but 後面又照著前面寫一樣？？

我覺得(C)只是ETS在亂寫 騙考生用的


[tab][tab]

[davidlee0222]

agree
C是流水句
本題句意不是要表達A,B,andC
而只是表達B not C就是A
所以用分號
D相當清晰
C變成第二個動作中間少了一個連接詞
運動用品店的消費者不會像百貨公司的消費者一樣衝動性購買
後面講的買B不買C就是前面所講的"不會衝動消費"

這題用第十一版的歸類應該是construction
文法結構

[michelle610]

想請教一下大衛兄
看了您在另一篇GWD24-20的討論之後 您說再OG第十一版的解釋裡面有提到
"what is understood可省略"
那麼在此題中 D選項的"those"省略也是可以的嗎???------>困擾中
另外想在請教一下 是不是只要在不破壞結構的情況下 只要是舊的資訊都可以省略呢----->這是OG第十一版所要告訴我們的ㄇ

多謝指導

[davidlee0222]

您提了兩個問題
第一個小弟個人認為這裡的those不可省
因為即便those is understood
省去後會ambiguity
比較必須清楚知道誰在跟誰比
不可以有誤解空間

第二個問題也是一樣狀況
所謂what is understood是指只有唯一意義可被任何人understood
如果有modifier problem如雙向修飾等
就不是what is understood

小弟剛過一遍十一版SC
解釋詳盡感覺功力有點小進步

[davidslin]

您提了兩個問題
第一個小弟個人認為這裡的those不可省
因為即便those is understood
省去後會ambiguity
比較必須清楚知道誰在跟誰比
不可以有誤解空間

第二個問題也是一樣狀況
所謂what is understood是指只有唯一意義可被任何人understood
如果有modifier problem如雙向修飾等
就不是what is understood

小弟剛過一遍十一版SC
解釋詳盡感覺功力有點小進步

請問一下,為何在GWD1-16中
Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.
答案
B.a greater proportion than

原句為Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than ( television costs did ) in any previous election
舊資訊就完全省略了?這樣不會誤解嗎?
謝謝

[davidlee0222]

逗號後是獨立的插入語
than (that) in any previous election
that必代proportion沒別的
只有唯一
所以是what is understood
要注意只有唯一的時候才能省

[davidslin]

逗號後是獨立的插入語
than (that) in any previous election
that必代proportion沒別的
只有唯一
所以是what is understood
要注意只有唯一的時候才能省

原句應該是Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than ( television costs accounted for more than half the spending ) in any previous election
省略的部分應該是括號內的而不是proportion吧?
如果是省略部分是proportion,那有人說省略television costs accounted for more than half the spending有人說省略proportion,不就會造成渾淆,所以更不應該省略,要用that或是those did表明誰跟誰比不是嗎?
可參考
http://www.formosamba.com/phpBB3/viewtopi ... c&start=15

如此易渾淆的句型都省略了舊資訊,原題those很明確的是指稱shoppers,照理也應可省略吧?

煩請指點,感激不盡

[clarence]

個人意見,省略的話
Shoppers in sporting goods stores, unlike (being) in department store
會不會產生是同一批人在兩個地方的歧義?
而不是強調比較兩種不同的客群的句子
抱歉我不太確定省略的部份該怎麼填回去
但在讀句子時候會有這種不清楚的感覺

[EmmaCYC]

those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well

請問這邊的"not" buy a pair....是省略(will) not buy a pair?
可以省略will嗎?

[EmmaCYC]

沒人回我...

[nexxt0722]

those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well

請問這邊的"not" buy a pair....是省略(will) not buy a pair?
可以省略will嗎?

是的,省略will

[lorance]

提供另一套解法:
本題考點為一致性,比較同類,代名詞
1. A, unlike B, VA (A跟B要同類比較:shoppers)
2.代名詞從頭到尾都需一致,否則會混淆
答案選項:
A:變成 shoppers 跟stores 比較
B:同上
C: those in department sotres, do (V1)very little implusing shopping, do (V2) not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketable, but leave....
其中V1跟V2之間沒有連接詞,另外they 在此容易造成混淆
D的答案很漂亮,因為someone解決了代名詞的問題,說明那些較不要衝動購買的那些人
E. 同A

[ggethan]

我自己的看法
GWD1-16
Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than in any previous election.
比的是同一種cost在不同時間點所占的比例多少,因此主詞相同可省
(cost是抽像的東西,從古到今都是一樣不會改變)

GWD3-30
Today’s technology allows manufacturers to make small cars that are more fuel-efficient than those at any other time in
production history.
比的是不同車子(一種省油,一種沒那麼省油),但這兩種車子是在不同時間被製造出來的,因此前面的today和後面的history只是說明形容這兩種車子被製造的時間點為何,真正要比的還是車子本身
(如果不補出cars,除非你能告訴我這堆車子同樣出現在現代跟同樣出現在過去只是一某個時空下比較省油,很怪)

GWD3-34
Shoppers in sporting goods stores, unlike those in department stores, do very ...
比的是不同批的消費者的消費行為,而在店裡和在百貨公司只是形容這兩批消費者所在的場所為何,真正要比的還是消費者本身
(如果不補出shopper,除非你能跟我說這群消費者同樣出現在百貨公司跟出現在體育用品店,他們的消費行為會不同,這應該不太合理吧)