ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: nemo11
打印 上一主题 下一主题

prep2-15 定语从句

[复制链接]
11#
 楼主| 发表于 2009-2-20 05:12:00 | 只看该作者

(B) investigating the effects (that changes in working conditions )would have on workers' performance

中 investigate后省略了that的宾语从句

investigatting (that) effects(that changes in working conditions) would have on workers' performance.

感觉意思上应该这样理解,但是effects是复数,changes为什么用单数呢?

12#
发表于 2009-2-20 08:10:00 | 只看该作者
changes在這是名詞不是動詞 ;-)
13#
发表于 2009-3-20 12:09:00 | 只看该作者
1
14#
发表于 2009-4-12 04:15:00 | 只看该作者

C/E中what the effects重复,要么what effects...(宾从),要么the effects that(宾语加定从)。

15#
发表于 2009-7-21 18:22:00 | 只看该作者
原来如此
16#
发表于 2009-8-9 08:43:00 | 只看该作者
up

17#
发表于 2009-8-18 22:43:00 | 只看该作者
ding
18#
发表于 2009-8-27 22:32:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用iser在2008/9/14 14:37:00的发言:

此题notes中讲得不太明白,研究了半天,说说我的一点看法:

(A) that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers' performance

A明显是their指代问题,逻辑上指代changes,形式上就近指代conditions。没什么问题。

(B) investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers' performance

B,notes中没有说错,that从句作为定从修饰effects,后面的on workers' performance也是修饰effects的。即

the effects (that changes in working conditions would have) on workers' performance

这就类似the book that you buy之类的从句,从句的主语为changes,谓语是would have。

(C) for investigating what the effects on workers' performance are that changes in working conditions would cause

(E) to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers' performance

C和E是一类,放在一起说。不知为什么notes里面对C的解释是空的,但是对E的解释是对的,就是E中what从句缺少谓语。这个what从句正确的语序应该为:

what the effects (that)changes in working conditions would have on workers' performance are

再回头看看C,这就是为什么C中莫名其妙多出个are that的原因,C是把E中缺的一个are和一个引导词that都补出来了,但是顺序完全不对。老notes里面说C的错误原因是that没有指代对象,这是不对的。因为that其实是个放错了地方的引导词。

(D) that investigated changes in working conditions' effects on workers' performance

最后,说说我错选的D,notes的解释是:表达不清晰,可以理解为changes in… effects,也可以理解为changes in working conditions

我觉得这个说法不对。这里并没有表意不清的问题,因为conditions'是所有格形式。根据OG解释,所有格形式的词的效用是形容词而非名词,如果其后有指示代词都无法指代,何况是逻辑上的歧义。

D的问题很明显是偷换概念,改变了原有逻辑重心,investigate的宾语中心词毫无疑问是effects,而非changes。这里将effects放到了修饰changes的地位明显是不对的。

另外附OG R86题及其解释,这里仅摘取了对所有格的说明。

86.  Since 1986,when the Department of Labor began to allow investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations began paying their investment advisers a small basic fee,with a contract promising higher fees if the managers perform well.

(A)  investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform,several corporations began

(B)  investment officers’ fees to be based on the performance of the funds they manage,several corporations began

(C)  that fees of investment officers be based on how the funds they manage perform,several corporations have begun

(D)  fees of investment officers to be based on the performance of the funds they manage,several corporations have begun

(E)  that investment officers’ fees be based on the performance of the funds they manage,several corporations began


The pronoun they lacks a referent.While they would seem to refer to investment officers’ , grammatically it cannot because investment officers’ is a possessive modifying fees, rather than a plural noun standing by itself. The sentence needs to be revised so that investment officers is a plural noun.


非常清晰。

19#
发表于 2009-8-29 11:06:00 | 只看该作者

the effects (that changes in working conditions would have) on workers' performance

that是定语从句,不是同位语从句

定语从句中that/which指代的先行词可在从句中作主语或宾语,这里effects在从句中作would have的宾语

20#
发表于 2009-9-27 15:00:00 | 只看该作者
ding
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, 2024-11-13 14:05
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