[討論]OG 32

[訪客]

32. Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were constructed in violation of the city's building code.
(A) Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were
(B) Some buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year had been
(C) Some buildings that the earthquake destroyed and heavily damaged last year have been
(D) Last year the earthquake destroyed or heavily damaged some buildings that have been
(E) Last year some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake had been

1.除了OG解釋外,我還有伊個問題想跟大家確認一下我的想法對不對
選項E的 some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged 是不是跟A選項的意思有差別

A:Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake=>一些被嚴重損壞的建築物
E: some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged=>那些被嚴重損壞的建築物裡頭的一些建築物
2.OG解釋裡有一個我覺得我在考試應該會很難發現的的bug,那就是destroyed跟heavily damaged是不能同時發生的,考試時我想我會先找那些大的 bug先刪一些掉,然後由大到細來慢慢刪除吧

[illuna]

恩.....本題老莫在講解的時候的確最強調的重點就是 destroyed 跟 damaged 是無法同時存在的.....

接著就是事情發生的先後順序以時態做區分....

至於 some buildings 跟 some of the buildings 後方的 that 形容詞子句都是修飾 buildings .....是否有所差別我是真的看不太出來.....只能說字少的比較簡潔吧?

請指正 (AA)

[魚]

1.除了OG解釋外,我還有伊個問題想跟大家確認一下我的想法對不對
選項E的 some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged 是不是跟A選項的意思有差別

A:Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake=>一些被嚴重損壞的建築物
E: some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged=>那些被嚴重損壞的建築物裡頭的一些建築物
2.OG解釋裡有一個我覺得我在考試應該會很難發現的的bug,那就是destroyed跟heavily damaged是不能同時發生的,考試時我想我會先找那些大的 bug先刪一些掉,然後由大到細來慢慢刪除吧

agree ! you got it

[bear]

同意mike講法!

[QQcandy]

兩者應該有差別...同意　Mike :)

[訪客]

(E) Last year some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake had been=>1.Last year放在前頭,時間副詞修飾全局,讓讀者搞不清楚是形容that子句還是主要子句

[Behemoth]

這邊last year放句首正確修飾了 buildings
其他錯誤的選項變成修飾earthquakes囉

[chocolatier]

請問大家..
依照ETS的解釋,正確B選的意思是"那些被地震損毀的建築　當初被建造地與city's building code不同"
可是為什麼不能想成"那些被地震損毀的建築　地震過後被建造地與city's building code不同＂　也就是C選(只因為句中錯誤使用and造成destroy和demage同時發生嗎?還是constructed常指首次的建造,損毀後的崇建要使用別的字嗎?)
做題時我的想法就是,被毀了後重建,當然不會與幾十年前的city's building code相同阿,所以不是應該被毀先,再重建,C選? 很疑惑
謝謝大家

[世界和平]

請問大家..
依照ETS的解釋,正確B選的意思是"那些被地震損毀的建築　當初被建造地與city's building code不同"
可是為什麼不能想成"那些被地震損毀的建築　地震過後被建造地與city's building code不同＂　也就是C選(只因為句中錯誤使用and造成destroy和demage同時發生嗎?還是constructed常指首次的建造,損毀後的崇建要使用別的字嗎?)
做題時我的想法就是,被毀了後重建,當然不會與幾十年前的city's building code相同阿,所以不是應該被毀先,再重建,C選? 很疑惑 *-)
謝謝大家 :smile

present perfect由持續進行至目前的用意，若套用在此，句意不通。

[oguz]

請問大家..
依照ETS的解釋,正確B選的意思是"那些被地震損毀的建築　當初被建造地與city's building code不同"
可是為什麼不能想成"那些被地震損毀的建築　地震過後被建造地與city's building code不同＂　也就是C選(只因為句中錯誤使用and造成destroy和demage同時發生嗎?還是constructed常指首次的建造,損毀後的崇建要使用別的字嗎?)
做題時我的想法就是,被毀了後重建,當然不會與幾十年前的city's building code相同阿,所以不是應該被毀先,再重建,C選? 很疑惑
謝謝大家

present perfect由持續進行至目前的用意，若套用在此，句意不通。

不知道我自己的解釋對不對:
(C)我是覺得語意上不合理, 這樣寫似乎damaged buildings與construct in violation of ...code之間無明確關聯性
而(D)是說明了上述兩者之間的一個關係, 也就是因為建築物先violate the building code, 才導致建築物被destroyed or damaged

不吝指教

[pgnash]

請問大家..
依照ETS的解釋,正確B選的意思是"那些被地震損毀的建築　當初被建造地與city's building code不同"
可是為什麼不能想成"那些被地震損毀的建築　地震過後被建造地與city's building code不同＂　也就是C選(只因為句中錯誤使用and造成destroy和demage同時發生嗎?還是constructed常指首次的建造,損毀後的崇建要使用別的字嗎?)
做題時我的想法就是,被毀了後重建,當然不會與幾十年前的city's building code相同阿,所以不是應該被毀先,再重建,C選? 很疑惑
謝謝大家

(C)如果修正destroyed and heavily damaged(and 改為or), 邏輯上應該沒問題, OG解釋上說: "Choices C and D use the present perfect tense incorrectly, saying in effect that the buildings have been constructed after they were destroyed last year."
=>句意變成: 先被震倒destroyed, 然後違規in violation...

但原題要的是: 先違規in violation.., 後被震倒destroyed
OG解釋說: (A) fails to indicate that the buildings were constructed before the earthquake occurred.
題目(A)雖然在時態上有錯, 但句意上還是要優先採用

個人淺見~