밑줄 친 부분 중 어법상 옳지 않은 것은?One of the most … | [국회직 9급 영어] 23년 1회차 기출문제 상세 페이지

밑줄 친 부분 중 어법상 옳지 않은 것은?
One of the most discussed causes of de-industrialisation has been the migration of jobs to newly industrialised countries. It has been ①argued that this represents the emergence of a new international division of labour in which the manufacturing functions of the inner areas of older industrial cities ②have been surpassed. This theory is able to ③account for a number of major, worldwide economic developments. These include the de-industrialisation of Western cities, the growth of cities in newly industrialised countries and the growth of global cities as the control and command centres of an interconnected world economy. However, despite this, the explanatory scope of this theory, while not ④to be incorrect, is limited. In relying ⑤so heavily on economic processes it is able to say little about, for example, the social geographies of cities that are clearly related to economic change. This theory is able to offer only one-directional explanations of the relationship between economic change and urbanisation.

①

②

③

④

⑤

어법상 옳지 않은 것은 “to be”로, 삭제하여 “while not incorrect”로 고쳐야 한다.
“while (it is) not incorrect”처럼 양보 부사절은 주어와 be동사를 함께 생략하고 형용사만 남길 수 있다. “while” 뒤에 to부정사를 둘 수는 없다.
“argued”: “It has been argued that ~”의 가주어·수동 구문으로 옳다.
“have”: 관계절의 주어가 복수 “the manufacturing functions”이므로 주어-동사 수일치가 맞다.
“account for”: “be able to” 뒤의 동사원형으로 “설명하다”라는 뜻이다.
“so”: 부사 “heavily”를 수식하는 부사로 옳다.