OG 247

[pcl12]

247. Faced with an estimated $2 billion budget gap, the city's mayor proposed a nearly 17 percent reduction in the amount allocated the previous year to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize hundreds of local arts groups.
(A)proposed a nearly 17 percent reduction in the amount allocated the previous year to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize
(B)proposed a reduction from the previous year of nearly 17 percent in the amount it was allocating to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and for subsidizing
(C)proposed to reduce, by nearly 17 percent, the amount from the previous year that was allocated for the maintenance of the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize
(D)has proposed a reduction from the previous year of nearly 17 percent of the amount it was allocating for maintaining the city's major cultural institutions, and to subsidize
(E)was proposing that the amount they were allocating be reduced by nearly 17 percent from the previous year for maintaining the city's major cultural institutions and for the subsidization

這題想請問兩個問題
1.在句中the previous year的位置是修飾?
2.og說BD中的it無名詞可指代,又扯到是mayor而不是city...
意思是說mayor才能allocate 而 it 雖應該指代無生命的city,但city卻無法主動
做allocate的動作?
對於代名詞的指代,觀念還不是很清楚
我看到時,以為it 會有指代不清的問題,可指代reduction or amount....
這樣想對嗎?
還是優先指代原題主詞...可這題主詞無法用it代
而BD在it 前有沒有缺乏連接詞?因為mayor proposed .....amount是一句
而it was allocating to ...又一句...
B的解釋
Furthermore, there is no grammatical referent for it in the phrase it was allocating.
D的解釋
In D, there is no grammatical referent for it in the phrase it was allocating: the mayor, not the city, is the subject of the clause.

[Pufa]

247. Faced with an estimated $2 billion budget gap, the city's mayor proposed a nearly 17 percent reduction in the amount allocated the previous year to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize hundreds of local arts groups.
(A)proposed a nearly 17 percent reduction in the amount allocated the previous year to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize
(B)proposed a reduction from the previous year of nearly 17 percent in the amount it was allocating to maintain the city's major cultural institutions and for subsidizing
(C)proposed to reduce, by nearly 17 percent, the amount from the previous year that was allocated for the maintenance of the city's major cultural institutions and to subsidize
(D)has proposed a reduction from the previous year of nearly 17 percent of the amount it was allocating for maintaining the city's major cultural institutions, and to subsidize
(E)was proposing that the amount they were allocating be reduced by nearly 17 percent from the previous year for maintaining the city's major cultural institutions and for the subsidization

這題想請問兩個問題
1.在句中the previous year的位置是修飾?
這裡是修飾amount，the amount (which was) allocated the previous year.
2.og說BD中的it無名詞可指代,又扯到是mayor而不是city...
意思是說mayor才能allocate 而 it 雖應該指代無生命的city,但city卻無法主動
做allocate的動作?
OG是說BD的it應該改為he or she才正確， the amount (that) he was allocating.
對於代名詞的指代,觀念還不是很清楚
我看到時,以為it 會有指代不清的問題,可指代reduction or amount....
這樣想對嗎?
還是優先指代原題主詞...可這題主詞無法用it代
而BD在it 前有沒有缺乏連接詞?因為mayor proposed .....amount是一句
而it was allocating to ...又一句...
ETS常用一串像葡萄一樣的複雜結構修飾句子，套句大衛說的話，一個題目簡化下來沒幾個字，找出那些被修飾的關鍵字，題目就好做多了 。
B的解釋
Furthermore, there is no grammatical referent for it in the phrase it was allocating.
D的解釋
In D, there is no grammatical referent for it in the phrase it was allocating: the mayor, not the city, is the subject of the clause.

[pcl12]

有點不懂the previous year是修飾amount?看不出來..........

[Calvin]

the previous year 是修飾 allocated

而 allocated the previous year 這個片語又修飾前面的 amount

FYI

[cocaine]

the previous year 是修飾 allocated

而 allocated the previous year 這個片語又修飾前面的 amount

FYI

沒錯..認同C大分析..
the previous year 是作 allocated 的受詞....

[best555tw]

為什麼這句有兩個動詞

proposed和 allocated
這兩個動作不是都mayor做的嗎

[Pufa]

為什麼這句有兩個動詞

proposed和 allocated
這兩個動作不是都mayor做的嗎

allocated在這裡~
the amount that was allocated.

[ustoday]

再問一個小問題
allocated the previous years 中
why 可以直接加the previous years ?
中間不用介詞 ex in 引導嗎?
請知道的大大告訴我一下
謝謝

[soaringally]

請教 propose的用法

選項E the city's mayor was proposing that the amount they were allocating be reduced by nearly 17 percert.........

因為歐機並沒有說這樣的用法是錯的（排除e 其他的錯誤 ） 所以我想知道propose的用法是不是跟require that S+ V (虛擬語態)的用法是一樣滴

[cynthia704]

YES. propose也是屬於假設法中的動詞唷^^

[世界和平]

再問一個小問題
allocated the previous years 中
why 可以直接加the previous years ?
中間不用介詞 ex in 引導嗎?
請知道的大大告訴我一下
謝謝

轉貼自CD:

薰衣紫草:
我認爲allocated是修飾amount的定語, 而the previous year作爲時間狀語, 按照狀語就近修飾, 應該也修飾amount. 如果要修飾allocate, 那allocate後面就應該加to.
我認爲全句沒有省略. 如果在previous之前再加in, 會引起歧義, 變成allocated in the previous year作爲整個後置定語來修飾amount.
amount allocated the pevious year: 去年的, 分配的量
amount allocated in the previous year: 分配進去年的量. 言下之意, 還有其他部分的量沒有分配給去年.

[kaijen]

請問一下 (C)為什麼不對?
to reduce 和 to subsidize也可以平行呀?
句意感覺也可以通..
謝謝

[weirdude]

C is wrong because "to maintain" is gone and will not obey the parallism.
is A the final answer?

[kaijen]

是的 The answer is (A)
I think a problem in (C) might be that
"that was allocated" 可以就近修飾the previous year
造成ambiguity

[dibert8]

這題我面臨 (A) (C) 決選的窘境,
1. 從句意上,兩個選項句意不同,但覺得 (C) 挖東牆補西牆的方式講的通(i.e.減大型文化機構的錢去貼地區藝術團體), (A) 刪減預算去維持並補貼兩種團體我時實在意會不過來(錢哪裡來?)
2. 從文法上 (A) 平衡 to maintain 和 to subsidize, (C) 平衡 to reduce 和 to subsidize; (C) 看不出不好哩!
因此有兩個問題:
1. (A) reduction in the amount allocated the previous year 文法上怎麼解? 這是我沒選 (A) 的關鍵: 看不懂這是什麼結構, the previous year 不像是 allocated 的受詞.即使是,意思也講不過去."前一年"又不是東西,怎麼分配? CD 的說法純屬咬文嚼字, 蠻難懂. 倒是有聽說美國人常省略時間副詞的 in, 就是 the previous year 之前事實上有介係詞 in, 因此原來的結構是 reduction in the amount allocated (in) the previous year, 但不解 ETS 為何會接受這樣的厘語用法?
2. 怎麼看出 to subsidize 不是和 to reduce 平衡?