Here are 2 thorny test items. Not sure if they are flawed. Would you please show your opinions?
(The two test items are designed for the college entrance exams in China. )
1 The retired man donated most of his savings to the school damaged by the earthquake in Yushu,_ _______ the students to return to their classrooms. (Jiangsu version 28)
A. enabling B. having enabled C. to enable D. to have enabled
The key is A. But why is C incorrect? Or are there 2 keys to the item?
2 Schools across China are expected to hire 50,000 college graduates this year as short-term teachers, almost three times the number hired last year, _____ reduce unemployment pressures.
(Jiangsu 26. )
A. help B. to have helped C. to help D. having helped
The key is C. If we choose C as the key, then this sentence structure seems to be the same as the above test item if we choose C. (to enable)
NOT A TEACHER.
I concur with TheParser. I don't see how you can justify the comma after "Yashu."
davidtao, the difference between the two sentences is that in the second one, there is a parenthetical comment (almost three times the number hired last year), which is set off by commas.
I'm with Parser and Jasmin that with the comma (and without a parenthetical comment) you cannot have the infinitive of purpose.
I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.
I think 1A is far better, given the comma; but I don't think 1C is necessarily wrong. Therefore, in a test in which you have to choose the best answer, 1A is the correct answer, and 1C is not.
A deluge of thanks to those who responded. HOwever, a big potato in grammar in Great Britain thinks that both A and C are acceptable in item No 1. I am still confused if such an item is flawed in a high stakes English language testing. Any furthur evidence to support or reject option C in Item No 1? Thanks in advance.
I am only a small cheese, but I am with Parser, Jasmin and Barb, for the reason that Barb gave.