ChaseDream

标题: 被击倒了 non-essential modifier [打印本页]

作者: 痴人也有梦 时间: 2018-12-24 07:42
标题: 被击倒了 non-essential modifier
A new test for AIDS has proved helpful in eliminating blood, contaminated with the virus, from the nation’s blood supply.
(A) in eliminating blood, contaminated with the virus, from the nation’s blood supply
(B) in eliminating blood from the nation’s blood supply that is contaminated with the virus
(C) in eliminating from the nation’s blood supply blood that is contaminated with the virus
(D) to eliminate blood that is contaminated with the virus from the nation’s blood supply
(E) to eliminate blood from the nation’s blood supply that is contaminated with the virus
一眼扫过a觉得这题没跑，太简单了。觉得表达清晰，逻辑合理。

结果....错误
中间的ved modifier 不是essential modifier ,去掉后句子意思彻底变了

我的天啊，怎么还有这么一招，之前没见过这样的大招。彻底被击垮了

作者: Attano 时间: 2018-12-25 14:40
呀这个题我也错了:-(
我其实一直搞不太清楚non-essential modifier来着，和LZ讨论一下，是不是要测试non-essential modifier，我们就忽略逗号中的内容，看句子意思是否改变就好，这个approach你觉得可以嘛？

作者: 痴人也有梦 时间: 2018-12-25 14:57

Attano 发表于 2018-12-25 14:40
呀这个题我也错了:-(
我其实一直搞不太清楚non-essential modifier来着，和LZ讨论一下，是不是要测试non-es ...

我从来没遇到过啊..所以当时很惊讶，郁闷为什么会错...扫了A后我其他选项都基本不看了
只能到gmatclub，Manhattan上搜别回答...
专家都这么说,我只能接受...想不通既然放在那个地方,,,理解的时候为啥不能算

引用：
第一个：
I don't see anything wrong here grammatically. Some test-takers like to skip ahead, eliminate anything with definite grammar errors, and then circle back to choices such as (A) that don't have any obvious mechanical errors -- and that's not a bad approach at all!

But whenever you get to (A), the problem is that the modifier tweaks the meaning of the sentence. It sounds like the test eliminates all blood from the nation's blood supply, and the modifier inside the commas ("contaminated with the virus") is presented as extra, non-essential information that just describes the blood. And that doesn't make sense: the test will be helpful in eliminating only the contaminated blood, not all of the blood. (A) is gone.

第二个：
“Please note that, in A, the commas surrounding contanimated with the virus imply that the modifier is NON-ESSENTIAL and can be removed without altering the basic meaning of the sentence. Without the modifier, A conveys the same strange meaning as B and E: A new test for AIDS has proved helpful in ELIMINATING BLOOD from the nation’s blood supply.”

关于D
D implies that the virus is FROM THE NATION'S BLOOD SUPPLY. The intended meaning is that virus has been introduced INTO the blood supply and that the new test has proved helpful in eliminating it. Eliminate D.

作者: 痴人也有梦 时间: 2018-12-25 15:06

Attano 发表于 2018-12-25 14:40
呀这个题我也错了:-(
我其实一直搞不太清楚non-essential modifier来着，和LZ讨论一下，是不是要测试non-es ...

non-essential modifier 是相对于 essential modifier

non-essential modifier 只是起到补充作用的，没有了不会影响句子理解

essential modifier必须存在，没了句子无法理解了

Ron的解释：the differences rhetorical: if the modifier narrows the possibilities for the preceding noun, then you should use an essential modifier (no comma).
if the modifier doesn't narrow the possibilities for the preceding noun -- i.e., if the modifier were removed, you would still know exactly which noun you were talking about -- then it should be a nonessential modifier (set off by commas).

the only way you're going to be asked to differentiate between the two is if they give you a problem in which the context makes the distinction entirely clear.

for instance:

* Alvin Toffler, who wrote the book Future Shock in 1970, was remarkably prescient.
--> in this case, you must use a nonessential modifier, since there is only one "Alvin Toffler" to whom we could possibly be referrin

另外的一个解释：

(1) The builder, who erects very fine houses, will make a large profit.
(2) The builder who erects very fine houses will make a large profit.
The first example, with commas, and with three short intonation curves, contains a non-restrictive relative clause. It refers to a specific builder, and assumes we know which builder is intended. It tells us firstly about his houses, then about his profits. The second example uses a restrictive relative clause. Without the commas, and with a single intonation curve, the sentence states that any builder who builds such houses will make profits.

作者: Attano 时间: 2018-12-25 15:08
说实话我排除C是因为它长的真太丑了，从没见过from那样插在中间的，而且 from blood supply blood?哇塞真是看不下去hhhh（真实脑回路）
BDE倒还好排，placement造成的ambiguity比较明显，但A真是清清爽爽干干净净，人见人爱。
不过不用nonessential modifier可以排么？毕竟A中，contaminated with the virus, from the nation’s blood supply 两个都是修饰名词的，最好是贴着，这里没贴，可以算个不足吗？

作者: 痴人也有梦 时间: 2018-12-25 15:13

Attano 发表于 2018-12-25 15:08
说实话我排除C是因为它长的真太丑了，从没见过from那样插在中间的，而且 from blood supply blood?哇塞真是 ...

我不懂太多的语法名堂哦
只是觉得contaminated with the virus修饰blood很清晰哦

from the nation’s blood supply 修饰前面的action也没问题吧

关键是人家都说语法上的确没问题，在逻辑意义上出了问题...

作者: Attano 时间: 2018-12-25 15:14

痴人也有梦发表于 2018-12-25 15:06
non-essential modifier 是相对于 essential modifier

non-essential modifier 只是起到补充作用的，没 ...

谢谢你
这篇回答很清晰啦

作者: 痴人也有梦 时间: 2018-12-25 15:18
(1) The builder, who erects very fine houses, will make a large profit.
(2) The builder who erects very fine houses will make a large profit.

这个例子很牛，我以前都理解错了
1的意思是那个builder 。。。就是你我都知道的那个盖房子盖的很好的builder将会大赚
2的意思完全不一样...这里是泛指只要能盖好房子的builder就能大赚

作者: 行素 时间: 2019-7-23 01:48
好厉害的题，C要是不换那个位置，没准很多人还不一定做错。

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