ChaseDream

标题: OG73 之迷惑 [打印本页]

作者: x4444 时间: 2005-4-9 14:17
标题: OG73 之迷惑

73. The British Admiralty and
the War Office met in March 1892 to consider a possible Russian attempt to
seize Constantinople and how they would
have to act militarily to deal with them.

(A) how they would
have to act militarily to deal with them

(B) how to deal with
them if military action would be necessary

(C) what would be
necessary militarily for dealing with such an event

(D)
what military action would be necessary in order to deal with such an event

(E) the necessity
of what kind of military action in order to take for dealing with it

两点疑惑：

1）B中if 后面更合适用should 而不是would。可否当定理？

2 ）为何错了。og解释说necessary militarily is awkward. 不是很明白为什么？

作者: 薰衣紫草 时间: 2005-4-10 07:05

1. 不可以

作者: TakeItEasy1 时间: 2005-5-7 18:57

2 ）C为何错了。og解释说necessary militarily is awkward. 不是很明白为什么？

恩,我也不明白,哪位NN解答一下?

作者: TakeItEasy1 时间: 2005-5-10 18:26
自己顶一下｀｀

作者: TakeItEasy1 时间: 2005-5-16 14:32
再顶一下``

作者: rakesun 时间: 2005-5-16 16:19
我的理解，2缺乏一个名词和前面的attempt对应。同时necessary militarily真的很awkward啊，呵呵。比如用中文说“必要的、军事的”不也很awkward吗，不如说必要的军事行动顺口啊。

作者: cg 时间: 2005-7-21 17:11

(C) what would be necessary militarily for dealing with such an event

这里militarily (adv.)修饰 necessary (a.) 翻成中文也是很拗口的 军事地必须的

另外，我觉得（C）将原题 act / action的意思给去除了，改变句意，应该也可以做为参考的依据

请指正！

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-7-21 17:11:41编辑过]

作者: autumn713 时间: 2006-10-9 20:04
C的for dealing 也應該有問題表示目的應該還適用to V

作者: henry_guo1982 时间: 2006-12-8 15:39
We really should make full use of the search tools to find former related discussion records.

作者: gonghao 时间: 2006-12-8 16:18
necessary militarily is not a noun and hard to understand what it is

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)