og 12 74帮忙

Jackjokes

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United
States reduced the amount of phosphates that
municipalities had been allowed to dump into the
Great Lakes.

(A)reduced the amount of phosphates that
municipalities had been allowed to dump

(B)reduced the phosphate amount that
municipalities had been dumping

(C)reduces the phosphate amount municipalities
have been allowed to dump

(D)reduced the amount of phosphates that
municipalities are allowed to dump

(E)reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for
dumping by municipalities

og解释说

the past perfect verb bad been allowed
should instead be the present are allowed (if the
agreement remained in effect when the sentence
was written) or the past were allowed (if the
agreement was no longer in effect when the
sentence was written)。

我不明白点：allow是关于：市政部门所允许的amount of phosphates ，这个允许是有没有这个agreement都存在的的。跟这个agreement没有半毛钱的关系，只是现在这个agreement出来了，减少了amount。 为啥说这个allow的时态和这个agreement的有没有效有直接关系呢？？？希望你们能看懂我的表达···

flyever98

对对对，我写错了，谢谢楼上指正！！

Jackjokes

我觉得这个allow跟agreement是有关系的，这里是说“人们被允许倒多少垃圾”，agreement规定了人们能够倾倒的 ...
flyever98 发表于 2013-1-31 07:06

that municipalities are allowed 只修饰phosphates 不修饰amount。reduce才是amount的直接动词。

flyever98

我觉得这个allow跟agreement是有关系的，这里是说“人们被允许倒多少垃圾”，agreement规定了人们能够倾倒的量。如果没有这个agreement，可能就没有必要设定 amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed，不存在允许倾倒的垃圾量了，因为没有了制约，也就没有了允许倾倒的量一说。
它规定的事有两种可能，一个是人们到现在还被允许倒多少垃圾（if the agreement was still in effect when the sentence was written）；另一个是人们在1972年以后但是在现在以前被允许倒多少垃圾（if the agreement was no longer in effect when the sentence was written）。时态上只有这两个可能，关键看写这句句子的时候agreement是否还生效。这里不能用过去完成时态，因为已经倒掉的垃圾，是不能被reduce的。
希望我说清楚了。= =

Yvonne320

OG的解释也基本是这样，从句修饰phosphates,说明这种允许是一个客观事实，过去有，现在还有，将来也还有。所以用一般现在时态。agreement减少的只是数量。