Emily Dickinson’s letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumbering her letters to anyone else.
A. Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumbering
B. Dickinson were written over a period that begins a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ended shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber
C. Dickinson, written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and that ends shortly before Emily’s death in 1886 and outnumbering
D. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother, ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, and outnumbering
E. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber
刚好我也看到这道题，看到曼哈顿论坛里Ron对这道题的解释，非常有用 ：
）
"occasionally, when it is completely unambiguous, "which" can refer
to a whole NOUN PHRASE that immediately precedes the comma."
有的时候，当在完全没有歧义的情况下，which可以指代前面的整个名词词组，
也就是x of y的形式。
“in this case, this noun phrase is "X's letters to Y". (note that
this noun phrase, as a unit, does immediately precede the comma.)”
注意到这道题里，这个名词词组"X's letters to Y是作为一个整体，并且直接
紧跟在逗号的前面，并且which指代这个人在这句话里是完全没有逻辑的，所以
这里的which就可以指代前面整个名词词组。
Here's the basic summary:
if you have "X of Y, which..."
then:
* if Y works as the antecedent of "which", then "which" should stand
for Y.
* if Y doesn't work as the antecedent, but "X of Y" DOES work, then
"which" can stand for "X of Y".
当看到“X of Y, which..”的形式的时候，如果它可以指代前面的Y，那么它
就指代前面的Y；如果Y不能作为先行词，但是X of Y可以，那么它就可以指代X
of Y.作者: pangpangshin 时间: 2011-5-31 06:42
which 是不能指代D 的，这样说吧，逗号前是一个介宾结构，这时候定语从句只修饰这个介宾的核心词就是letter。OG后面解释几乎都是这样，题目也是这样用的。作者: rebecw 时间: 2011-6-1 06:36
