ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 9678|回复: 27
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助!快要考了!og180没有问过的问题

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-9-4 13:21:00 | 只看该作者

求助!快要考了!og180没有问过的问题

180. Quasars are so distant that their light has taken billions of years to reach the Earth; consequently, we see them as they were during the formation of the universe.



(A)  we see them as they were during



(B)   we see them as they had been during



(C) we see them as if during



(D)  they appear to us as they did in



(E)   they appear to us as though in

我不明白的是答案C为何说 Choice C presents a dangling adverbial modifier, as if during ..., that illogically modifies we see. ?这个修饰问题怎么判断的阿,有没有什么原则啊?谢谢指教!


[此贴子已经被作者于2004-9-6 0:14:18编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2004-9-4 23:40:00 | 只看该作者

我是这样理解的:

dangling表示状语没有修饰对象,那么从语法上看, 这里的during介词短语表示时间修饰see, 意思是我们好像在宇宙形成的时间看它们。这明显是不合逻辑的。

板凳
发表于 2004-9-5 00:18:00 | 只看该作者

我认为是个省略的形式


we see them as if (we are )during


是错的

地板
 楼主| 发表于 2004-9-5 06:47:00 | 只看该作者

谢谢两位的指点,体会到两位的意思了,泡泡同学是不是括号里面的we are应该改成we were呢?

但是我觉得这里有了as if就说明是“像而不是”,是个比喻,举个例子

“looked as if she were made of ice.她看起来似乎是冰做的”(摘自金山词霸)


我觉得原文要是说we see them during 。。。。。。这样才会不合逻辑,加上了as if我觉得没有什么不合逻辑的阿,是不是我又钻到死牛角尖离去了,帮忙把我拖出来

5#
发表于 2004-9-5 15:20:00 | 只看该作者

谢谢两位的指点,体会到两位的意思了,泡泡同学是不是括号里面的we are应该改成we were呢?

不错,as if后面多数情况下用虚拟语气,表示与事实相反。See the following example:

For some reason the new consultant treats his clients like idiots, talking to them like they were mentally deficient and incapable of understanding more than the simplest ideas.

(A) like idiots, talking to them like they

(B) as if they were idiots, talking to them like they

(C) like idiots, talking to them as if they

(D) as idiots, talking to them like theyC

(E) like idiots who

6#
发表于 2004-9-5 19:51:00 | 只看该作者

我的理解是,在OG中講到dangling是指修飾的主詞出現問題,好比og-180的ABC都會變成修飾we, 邏輯出現問題

as if 是正確用法,沒有dangling的問題

7#
 楼主| 发表于 2004-9-5 23:44:00 | 只看该作者

谢谢rhod斑竹的例子,让我确定了as if 的用法。

agk99:谢谢你的回答,但是og的解释说a dangling adverbial modifier, as if during ..., (这里好像是说修是动词的啊)that illogically modifies we see(这里我觉得跟rhod说得差不多就是修饰see的,怎么会修饰we呢?)

既然og说 illogically modifies we see,那么,what should it logically modify?还请继续指点!

8#
发表于 2004-9-6 04:32:00 | 只看该作者

我沒有說清楚,抱歉,

注釋是說,as if during這個副詞短語,是一個dangling modifier,因為他會錯誤修飾we see

我自己想像是,as if該往後修飾,但後面看不到主詞,往前找,只有we see可以修飾,但事實上as if該修飾Quasars而不是we, 與A比較起來,C省略了they 導致句意dangling

你讀的可真細呀,讓我又多了點收獲

9#
 楼主| 发表于 2004-9-6 04:58:00 | 只看该作者

哦,是有这点意思,再仔细体会

“as if該往後修飾,”
这是哪里的规则?准确么?谢谢你!

10#
发表于 2004-9-6 06:04:00 | 只看该作者
She spoke to me as if she knew me.如果改一下,She spoke to me as if I were her friend. 两个句子,如果我们都把as if后的主语和谓语去掉,你能判断出as if后的句子说的是谁么?不能,所以,很明显,as if后省略了主谓结构造成句子要说明对象十分模糊。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-27 09:34
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部