In the United States, a primary election is a method _____ voters select the nominees for public office.
(A)that (B)is that (C)by which (D)by those
- LouisLv 76 年前最佳解答
The fact that you were late again made my angry.（內容相等，是限定性質的同位語。the fact = that fact）
Bob's problem, how he could open the locked door, seemed insoluble. （非限定的同位語，因為problem受到了Bob's的限定，是唯一的，就不能再受限定了）
He has an earnest wish that he should go abroad.（和受詞同位，是限定性質的同位語，因為wish受到earnest的限定後，a = one，雖然也是唯一的，但因內容仍不明確，所以可以再受到同位語的限定）
In the United States, a primary election is a method by which voters select the nominees for public office.（畫線部分是限定性質的修飾語，將普通名詞a method的範圍約束之後，才會跟a primary election相等，才能當其「主詞補語」。
Voters select the nominees for public office through a primary election.
The primary election is a method for voters to select the nominees for public office.
所以選民經由primary election來選公職人員時，primary election才是一個「方法」。而voters select the nominees for public office本身並不是方法，而是一個「行動」。「行動」與method不相等。
In the United States, a primary election is a method that voters use to select the nominees for public office.
2014-10-18 19:58:24 補充：
- Dark HelmetLv 76 年前
路易士厲害！ You hit the nail on the head!
Restrictive (not restricted) 或 nonrestrictive clause非此句爭論的重點, 也不是靠 which/that 來區分
“Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and Remove All Doubts." ～Abe Lincoln
- DaSaGwaLv 76 年前
Using appositive (同位語) to explain is a little "fudge" (蒙混) After all, the real problem is NOT appositive, but
restricted and non-restricrted (relative) clause
Usually, "that" is used with a restricted clause, and "which" is with a non-restricted one. You cannot use "that", because it is for restricted, yet, there is "a" (indefinite article,不定冠詞) in front of "method", it indicates that "method" is NOT restricted, otherwise, it shall use "the" (definite article, 定冠詞).
On the other hand, when you use "which" for non-restricted, you suppose to have " , " in front of "which
" (to indicate non-restricted). However, there is exception, that is, when use
by which, for which, in which
you will NOT need " , "
This is why you have to choose "by which".
Be honest with you, as for me, I will NOT care so much about restricted or non-restricted (only happen in American English, not in British English). Instead I would try to understand the context, and to me for the context, "by which" is a better choice among all the available choices.
By the way, in your questioned sentence, it is better to use "their nominees" instead of "the nominees" because of "voters"
2014-10-18 12:55:35 補充：
You can google "by which", "in which", "for which", you will see many sentence examples, and most of them have no " , " Very few still do, simply because the "non-restricted" rule is still followed.
2014-10-18 13:03:03 補充：
Using "by which", it means "through a primary election" (通過初選)
If you choose "that" (regardless grammar), it means "method" (方法).
2014-10-18 13:03:30 補充：
As you can see, "by which" would make the context more comprehensive than "that". This is why I would prefer to use my understanding of the context to make the choice.