介词短语可以作为时间状语, 地点状语,...等等对对象进行修饰. 其位置的变换可能引起歧义. 现将其判断方法总结如下: (此总结适用与介词短语处在划线部分)
以下例子均取自OG
A. 介词短语放置的原则: 就近修饰---修饰谁跟着谁
110. It has been estimated that the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy in lost industrial output and tax revenues is at least $20 billion a year.
(A) the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy in lost industrial output and tax revenues is at least $20 billion a year
(B) the annual cost of illiteracy to the United States is at least $20 billion a year because of lost industrial output and tax revenues
(C) illiteracy costs the United States at least $20 billion a year in lost industrial output and tax revenues
(D) $20 billion a year in lost industrial output and tax revenues is the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy（C）
(E) lost industrial output and tax revenues cost the United States at least $20 billion a year because of illiteracy
Choices A, D, and E are awkward and confused because other constructions intrude within the phrase cost... of illiteracy: for greatest clarity, cost should be followed immediately by a phrase (e.g., of illiteracy ) that identifies the nature of the cost.
既然修饰谁跟着谁, 那修饰主语的介词短语自然就跟着主语, 然后接下来便是谓语, 可这却犯了ETS的禁忌.
B. 介词短语放置的禁忌: 插在主语和谓语之间.
190. Manifestations of Islamic political militancy in the first period of religious reformism were the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in
(A) Manifestations of Islamic political militancy in the first period of religious reformism were the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in Nigeria, the Mahdi in the Sudan, and
(B) Manifestations of Islamic political militancy in the first period of religious reformism were shown in the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in Nigeria, the Mahdi in the Sudan, and also
(C) In the first period of religious reformism, manifestations of Islamic political militancy were the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, of the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in Nigeria, the Mahdi in the Sudan, and
(D) In the first period of religious reformism, manifestations of Islamic political militancy were shown in the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in Nigeria, the Mahdi in the Sudan, and（E）
(E) In the first period of religious reformism, Islamic political militancy was manifested in the rise of the Wahhabis in Arabia, the Sanusi in Cyrenaica, the Fulani in
Furthermore, in A and B the in... reformism phrase has been awkwardly set between the subject and verb of the sentence.
C. 禁忌中的例外: 介词短语位于从句里面, 而整个从句修饰主语
32. Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were constructed in violation of the city’s building code.
(A) Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in the earthquake last year were
(B) Some buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year had been
(C) Some buildings that the earthquake destroyed and heavily damaged last year have been
(D) Last year the earthquake destroyed or heavily damaged some buildings that have been（B）
(E) Last year some of the buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake had been
正确答案B中介词短语in the earthquake last year 就是封闭在that从句里, 修饰主语.
D. 若要修饰主语, 如何避免禁忌: 将介词短语提前.
上面的例子190就是将In the first period of religious reformism提到句首. 但只有修饰主语的介词短语可以这么做(其实是必须这么做). 修饰其他成分的介词短语被提前会改变原文意思. 上面32中的E, last year(虽然不是介词引导, 但也是状语)本来就近修饰earthquake, 但被提前后就变成修饰整个句子.
解题技巧: a. 修饰主语以外的介词结构修饰谁跟着谁, 不能隔开或随便移动位置.
b. 修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间. 除非这个介词结构被封闭在从句或者同位语里面, 但绝对不能是单单的一个介词结构插在主谓之间.
谢谢紫草MM，好东东！
b. 修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间. 除非这个介词结构被封闭在从句或者同位语里面, 但绝对不能是单单的一个介词结构插在主谓之间.
这里是否将其理解为“修饰主句的介词结构”会更好？因为如果修饰主语，则根据就近原则可以放在主语后面，而如果作状语修饰主句则放在整句句首（包括从句）比较好。
请提意见！
"B. 介词短语放置的禁忌: 插在主语和谓语之间."
这一点一直没有注意到，谢谢MM提醒。赞~~
谢谢紫草MM，好东东！
b. 修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间. 除非这个介词结构被封闭在从句或者同位语里面, 但绝对不能是单单的一个介词结构插在主谓之间.
这里是否将其理解为“修饰主句的介词结构”会更好？因为如果修饰主语，则根据就近原则可以放在主语后面，而如果作状语修饰主句则放在整句句首（包括从句）比较好。
请提意见！
可是OG190里修饰的就是主语, 而且解释里也明确说是"主谓".
谢谢紫草MM，好东东！
b. 修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间. 除非这个介词结构被封闭在从句或者同位语里面, 但绝对不能是单单的一个介词结构插在主谓之间.
这里是否将其理解为“修饰主句的介词结构”会更好？因为如果修饰主语，则根据就近原则可以放在主语后面，而如果作状语修饰主句则放在整句句首（包括从句）比较好。
请提意见！
OG256 Three out of every four automobile owners in the
(A) Three out of every four automobile owners in the
(B) Out of every four, three automobile owners in the
(C) Bicycles are owned by three out of every four owners of automobiles in the
(D) In the
(E) Out of every four owners of automobiles in the
this kind of sentences can prove that 修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间is kind of wrong
感谢楼上提供反例. 不过我有个问题:
我认为整个句子省略了另一个owners. 句子还原可以写成:
Three (owners) out of every four automobile owners in the
如果是这样的话, three owners是主语, 而out of...修饰主语, in the U.S. 修饰的其实不是主语, 而修饰(主语的修饰语). 所以按照就近修饰的原则, 这样的句子没错.
请多指教.
有道理.谢谢
今天早上半梦半醒的时候忽然想到一个问题, 赶快起来第一件事就是来发这个贴子.
ringcheng想的是对的! 但我们两个是从不同的角度考虑. OG190原文中的介词是修饰主语, 而正确答案的介词修饰的整个句子, 以此我们可以推出修饰主语就是修饰主句(正确答案不会改变原文的意思), 所以ringcheng跟我的理解都是一样.
我又看了一遍这帖，觉得把这些介词短语限定为表时间，地点或范围的介词短语会不会好一些，因为介宾短语作宾语补足语的话位置就由宾语来定了，那么倒装结构或是同位语结构，独立主格结构都会出现介词短语与你所说的规则矛盾的地方。所以如果限定一下估计不会有反例或者例外情况这些说法了。
一点想法供大家参考：
介词短语不能放在主胃之间，这是绝对错误的，举个很简单的例子
the man with a red beard is talking to Henry's father
这里的介词短语作修饰语没问题，而楼主举的例子里介词短语需要担当状语角色，所以才有OG的那段解释。
介词短语可以作状语，也可以做名词/动词修饰语，还可以作主补、宾补、主语
作主语补语、宾语补语、主语没什么问题
作名词修饰语时候，介词短语一般放在名词修饰语之后（后置修饰语）
作状语时候可放句首、句中、句尾。若放在句中，则一定要用逗号将这个成分隔离开来
被ETS利用的问题是：做状语的介词短语如果紧跟一个名词，按照就近修饰的原则，自然会引起歧义
那么问题其实就归到一点：怎么识别一个介词短语是作修饰语还是作状语
要解决这个问题，其实就是理解句子意思，读懂了句子，明白了介词短语要修饰的对象，歧义问题立即解决
比如这个句子按照就近修饰：Manifestations of Islamic political militancy in the first period of religious reformism were，（在宗教的改革主义的第一个时期的Islamic的政治斗争）的表现是，看看这象什么话？？比较正确答案一眼就发现歧义
再比如：Some buildings that were destroyed or heavily damaged in the earthquake last year had been（这里的in the earthquake没有紧跟什么名词，显然是作这个从属定语分句的状语）
再比如Three out of every four automobile owners in the
感谢楼上金玉良言. 我这两天也确实冥思苦想一些反例的存在. 多谢楼上提醒. 有了大家的讨论才不会坐观井底, 不知今昔是何年.
本人不敢自诩能总结所谓公理, 只不过徘徊于effectiveness与correctiveness之间, 踌躇挣扎罢了. 总结本身要比推翻总结更难, 因为证明一个东西是对的要比证明他是错的更费周张. 在总结, 推翻, 再总结, 再推翻的过程中, 语法中的missing pieces渐渐映出成型的风景.
衷心希望看到质疑的反馈. 本来就没什么资历夜郎自大, 更期望能有高人点拨.
MM or JJ可能误会了我上面一大段话的真正目的，推翻什么并不重要，重要的是怎样做题才能有效的预防错误
SC只考最粗浅的语法，简单的讲，把SC的句子翻译为中文，我想大家都不会错多少SC的
这一点是否可以提示我们，做题目多理解意思，少总结条例呢？
天下本无事, 庸人自扰之.
此"庸人"乃在下是也, 望前辈见谅.
逻辑意思实为SC之龙脉. 得之, 攻城夺邑, 势如破竹; 失之, 丢盔弃甲, 溃不成军. 然在下天资愚笨, 勤奋不足, 更奈何分秒寸金, 苟且妄寻捷径, 如有冒犯, 还望大侠海涵.
谢谢紫草MM的短信！起得这么早，注意身体啊！
先说说我对做SC题的一点粗简看法吧，希望与大家一起讨论：
首先我同意：不论是做SC，逻辑，阅读还是数学，GAMT考的都是事物间的逻辑关系。逻辑和阅读不用多说，大家肯定都有深刻体会。就SC而言，对逻辑关系的体现很重要的一点在于：句子各种成份之间的逻辑关系连系是否合理（我理解为correctiveness的出题原则），简单来说就是它的意思说得通吗？这就是为什么说：On leaving the department store, John's wallet was stolen. 这句话逻辑主语不对，导致逻辑意义出问题（只能是人on leaving, 钱包不可以！！）。其它的比如主谓一致，以及我们在这里讨论的修饰对象的歧义问题，都是属于correctiveness的范畴。
另外，当逻辑意思与语法规则相冲突时（如OG12），则以逻辑意思为首要条件修改句子。
12. Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.
(A) Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium. —>同一句两个they指不同，错; 第二个they优先指代主句主语，逻辑错
(B) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses. —>they指formulas错
(C) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, new small businesses are not subject to the same applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity as established big businesses. —>are subject to不合语法，少are
(D) Because new small businesses are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to them in the same way as to established big businesses.（D）
(E) New small businesses are not subject to the applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity in the same way as established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium. —>不合语法；they指代不清（到底是指small business 还是big businesses），也少are
其次, 对于逻辑意思的把握非一日而蹴，需要多多地练习来准确地理解句意以及排除ETS越来越隐蔽的混淆选项。在这个过程中，我认为总结必不可少，所谓“学而不思则惘，思而不学而怠”：光思考不练会陷入空洞的理论而缺少对实战的敏感度，而一心埋头赶路，不抬头看天也会非常容易陷入死胡同，成绩无法得以有质的提高。只有进行阶段性总结和练习才能使自己对SC的出题点和逻辑意思把握得更好，才会出现“AHA！”的情况。不过话说回来，可能各人各异吧，有N人凭语感也可以做好题呢，呵呵。我想Kingsoft在SC的逻辑意思方面颇有研究，可否再进一步与我们分享心得体会呢？他山之石，可以攻玉。非常感谢！
最后，我认为，总结不在于记住语法的条条框框，什么主谓一致，逻辑主语，这些都是要在理解它的逻辑含义的基础之上完全消化并转化为解题时自己的逻辑思维，所谓“手中无剑，心中也无剑“。我最初看白勇的书，死记硬背because 大于because of 大于due to，虽然是记下来了，可是不知道为什么？后来在看OG解释时才恍然大悟：并非指这些词组有什么必然的优先级关系，而是指当表达“什么东西怎么样”（套用GWD）这样一个完整句子时，用because要远远好于because of sb doing，而如果只是接简单一个名词，用because of sth又要远远好于because, 这种优先级关系我认为属于efficiency范畴。再比如，很多错误选项为什么看着别扭，你说它REDUNDENCY也好，笨拙也好，我理解为直接造句法的问题（这在OG某题有解释）：可以直接说“什么东西怎么样”的时候，为什么要绕着弯说？
我相信大家来CD的目的都是为了参与讨论，真理不辩不明嘛。只有不断地思想碰撞才会迸发新的火花！如果有OFFENCE，那也可以理解为无法面对面地沟通引成的误解。浮云皆散去，一笑尽了之！
以文会友, 人生几何.
ringcheng一曲相和, 此乃共鸣.
我也谈谈我的看法: 逻辑很重要, 但逻辑是一个很抽象的概念. 如果阅读不过关, 逻辑只是空中楼阁. 所以, 要加强阅读理解能力, 特别是阅读速度. 同时, 语法也很重要. 每句句子的意思都是不一样的, 如果一句一句的攻克而不总结, 最终就会陷入题海战. 总结也是分阶段的. 第一次的总结大多是最基本的固定结构, 主谓等等, 接下来的总结就会是不同情况下的不同分析, 最后也许就是信息层次或者干脆超越总结, 突破自己原有的思维模式, 把条理变成一种感觉. 每一次水平飞跃之后回头看以前的想法都会觉得很浅, 很幼稚, 但那是必经阶段, 没有那些累积也就没有最后的胸有成竹.
有道理，对于大多数人来说，这是从必然王国走向自由王国的道路，是Avantasia --传说中的精神与精灵的世界, 异教徒打开第七封印的必经之路（不好意思，一时没想到别的词，借用一下Avantasia版主的名字：））
条条大路通罗马，真心希望和欢迎有更多像Kingsoft这样的朋友多提不同意见，众人抬柴火焰高呀！！
OG199. Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern
(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern
(D) in the eastern
(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West
好贴子，正在想这个问题，发现有现成的！
OG199. Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern
(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern
(D) in the eastern
(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred with comparable magnitude in the West
OG199的确与紫草JJ所说的不一样,是awkwardly set between the subject and verb of the sentence的反例
我也是在OG里面看见好几个反例,才再一度看这个帖子
252. Three out of every four automobile owners in the
(A) Three out of every four automobile owners in the
(B) Out of every four, three automobile owners in the
(C) Bicycles are owned by three out of every four owners of automobiles in the
(D) In the
(E) Out of every four owners of automobiles in the
238. According to a recent study by Rutgers University, the number of women in state legislatures has grown in every election since 1968.
(A) the number of women in state legislatures has grown
(B) the number of women who are in state legislatures have grown
(C) there has been growth in the number of women in state legislatures
(D) a growing number of women have been in state legislatures (A)
(E) women have been growing in number in state legislatures
这种帖子要留名的。楼上斑主提出的反例我想可以这么描述。就意思而言，og199描述的是两个地震。一个东边一个西边。所谓介词短语前置，一般是作壮语修饰整句。但是og199写的是两个比较，因此这个介词短语是修饰第一个地震的定语，需要紧跟修饰词。斑竹觉得有道理么
修饰主语的介词结构应该提到句首, 不能插在主谓之间. 除非这个介词结构被封闭在从句或者同位语里面, 但绝对不能是单单的一个介词结构插在主谓之间.
我这么考虑,是否版主提到的这个错误是effective的.所以来说最后的判断还要依靠文章的逻辑走向.比较浅薄了.
感谢大家啊,让我了解了这么多细节的问题....
好佩服阿~
好精彩~!
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |