ffice" />原答案：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears. protecting作定语用。fficeffice" />
根据提示可否有以下几个答案：
改进1：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, used to protect warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
以上两个句子的末尾都是是作定语修饰animal-hide shields with wooden frames；但是[改进1]句子中的：used to protect更确切，比protecting 更易理解为定语。
改进2：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method of protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
这个改进后的句子是否正确，可否理解为，a method是逗号前面的同位语部分呢？
我感觉to do 放句未，在gmat中99%错，我还没印象有对的例子，而且to do本身单独用一般有表目的意味，这里没这个意思。to do在gmat中多用于词组。
听大虾们这么解释，完全清楚了！
请问一下：39－B/D的as为什么是incorrect?
stoneren ：as是连词，不能这么用。
个人认为改进2正确，原因一见og191答案d的解释
Lawmakers are examining measures that would require banks to disclose all fees and account requirements in writing, provide free cashing of government checks, and to create basic savings accounts to carry minimal fees and require minimal initial deposits.
(A) provide free cashing of government checks, and to create basic savings accounts to carry
(B) provide free cashing of government checks, and creating basic savings accounts carrying
(C) to provide free cashing of government checks, and creating basic savings accounts that carry
(E) to provide free cashing of government checks, and to create basic savings accounts that carry
Choice E, the best answer, is the only choice that maintains parallelism with the infinitive phrases to disclose..., [to] provide ..., and to create .... In A and B, the second element lacks the infinitive marker to. Choice C loses parallelism by shifting to a participial phrase, creating .... Choice D loses parallelism by dropping the conjunction and', a modification problem results because the participial phrase creating ... attaches to the noun checks, thus distorting the meaning of the last element of the parallel construction.
原因2，protecting〉〉好于used to protect ，更简洁
我的问题，为什么答案D中creating basic savings accounts to carry 不能成为 to provide
free cashing of government checks的结果壮语？是以下可能原因吗：to provide free
cashing of government checks的逻辑主语是banks ，而banks provide free cashing of
government checks，creating basic savings accounts to carry 句中creating basic savings
accounts to carry 优先成为定语？？？怎么感觉这么怪啊？？？
请牛牛指点，怎样区分在句末的定语修饰和壮语修饰啊？我发现自己问了个和楼主一样的问题。
又重新看了原贴，还是糊涂啊。
请牛牛指点。
请问一下：39－B/D的as为什么是incorrect?
as 可不可以作为介词，解释为“作为”，不太理解'as a protection of为什么是错的。请哪位侠士指点。
as 可不可以作为介词，解释为“作为”，不太理解'as a protection of为什么是错的。请哪位侠士指点。
39D. For members of the seventeenth-century
"as" is typically used to compare people/objects/ideas in the same class. There are examples from Longman:
As a parent, I feel that more should be done to protect our children.
A large flat stone was used as a table.
Dad dressed up as Santa Claus.
The result of last week's election will be seen as a victory for the right-wing government.
"items of military equipment" and a protection aren't in the same class. the use of "items of military equipment" may be.
多多讨论...
Here are my personal opinions:
1. When "as" is used as a prep., it refers to the "closest" noun phrase, which, in this case, is "items of military equipment".
2. a protection seems to be a abstract idea. let's say "a protection" is a protective object. then there is a number disagreement. See OG's explanation:
Choice C is best because the participle protecting begins a phrase that explains what the shields did. Choices A and B awkwardly use the singular word method to refer to items of military equipment rather than to the use of such items. Also, a method of protecting would be more idiomatic than a method to protect in A or a method protecting in B. In B and D, as is incorrect; also, a protection in D has no noun for which it can logically substitute. Choice E is incomplete; used to protect would have been acceptable.
A good example in OG 54B:
Galileo was convinced that natural phenomena, as manifestations of the laws of physics, would appear the same to someone on the deck of a ship moving smoothly and uniformly through the water as to a person standing on land.
For its discussion, see http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=23&ID=51315
请教
49. The cameras of the Voyager II spacecraft detected six small, previously unseen moons circling Uranus, which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting the distant planet
which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known to orbit
which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known in orbit around
doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known that orbit
d中的as orbiting中的as是不是adv，表示“同样的”的意思。
而to do通常表目的，doing通常表示正在延续的动作？ 谢谢！
If we revise t
Protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment for members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa.
Looks better for me.
看了39题的观点：“
JerryGuan2004-2-22 15:04:00
“改进2：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method of protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
这个改进后的句子是否正确，可否理解为，a method是逗号前面的同位语部分呢？”
dreadpower2004-2-22 23:28:00
改进2：同位语的话，就是说military equipment是a method ，逻辑概念不对等” ”
同38题，Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area.
那么39题的：
For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method of protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
这么改难道不对么？我觉得对啊.
还有：到底a method是逗号前面的同位语部分呢，还是独立主格结构？我看38题的OG提问中有人说是独立主格结构，到底是什么？为什么？
请指教，谢谢。
according to the explanation of OG, it's no doubt that "protecting" is modified to "shield", so I think the explanation of BraveMBA is right.
我也同意BRAVEMBA的观点，只是想知道改后的情况。
继续顶我的问题：）
再问：“
看了39题的观点：“
JerryGuan2004-2-22 15:04:00
“改进2：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method of protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
这个改进后的句子是否正确，可否理解为，a method是逗号前面的同位语部分呢？”
dreadpower2004-2-22 23:28:00
改进2：同位语的话，就是说military equipment是a method ，逻辑概念不对等” ”
同38题，Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area.
那么39题的：
For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method of protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
这么改难道不对么？我觉得对啊.
还有：到底a method是逗号前面的同位语部分呢，还是独立主格结构？我看38题的OG提问中有人说是独立主格结构，到底是什么？为什么？
请指教，谢谢。”
顺便菜鸟一句：“怎样引用别人的发言啊？”
使劲顶～～
开始我也以为protecting是状语，不过看了上面的讨论，后来想一想，确实应该是定语。
不过我觉得是修饰宾语equipment的更合适更容易理解。
是不是可以这样理解：定语修饰名词，状语修饰动词或者形容词。如果这里作状语，不是修饰were就是修饰essential。不妨用中文的"地"和"得"来试验一下。“保护...地是”和“保护...得重要”都解释不通，只有“保护...的器具”可以解释，由此可见是定语。
在张道真的语法书上有这么一句话：
as if to remind him, the church clock struck eleven.
这不是意味着to表示目的的时候可以修饰物吗？
开始我也以为protecting是状语，不过看了上面的讨论，后来想一想，确实应该是定语。
不过我觉得是修饰宾语equipment的更合适更容易理解。
是不是可以这样理解：定语修饰名词，状语修饰动词或者形容词。如果这里作状语，不是修饰were就是修饰essential。不妨用中文的"地"和"得"来试验一下。“保护...地是”和“保护...得重要”都解释不通，只有“保护...的器具”可以解释，由此可见是定语。
我觉得应该是定语，根据就近原则应该修饰eqeuipment，至于前面有人提到的如果修饰equipment就会有范围狭隘之嫌，我觉得这里shilds是保护武士的军事装备，而不是其他类型的军事装备，这才是军事装备需要限制的原因。
bravamba关于现在分词作伴随状语和结果状语的观点很有道理，但关于现在分词修饰句子主语的观点值得商榷，实际上现在分词在句尾作定语，最可能修饰它前面离它最近的名词，如果前面句子中出现多余一个的名词的话，就可能出现出现歧义。
发完上贴才又想到以下问题：
bravemba关于现在分词的观点是不是应该这样理解：如果现在分词前面有逗号（这才是真正的分词放在句尾吧），现在分词不会是修饰都好前面的名词，而应该是修饰句子主语。因为如果要修饰它最近的名词的话，就不能有逗号。也只后在没有逗号的情况下，才会根据就近原则来判断现在分词到底修饰谁的问题？
欢迎讨论。
那么该如何区分是修饰句子主语还是修饰就近的名词而不会造成歧义呢？是不是根据现在分词前面是不是有逗号？
我的帖子有点乱，因为认识还不够清晰，抱歉。问题澄清了，欧在修改吧。
这跟我的理解正好相反，我觉得：如果修饰最近的名词，现在分词前不能，也许需要，有逗号；如果加了逗号修饰的内容就不应该是逗号前面的名词（否则就不需要逗号了），应该是句子主语或其他成分，这样可能造成被修饰成分不够清晰的问题。
不是很同意楼上的意见， 个人认为protecting是做定语修饰前面的名词 items of military equipment. 这里, protecting 其实可以理解为, which 引导的非限定定语从句，那么一般which 是就近修饰前面的名词
一家之言，欢迎讨论！
OG11上原文解释为 the participle protecting creates a modifying phrase that clearly explains the purpose of the items of military equipment.
---也就是说此处是表目的的. 现在分词用在句尾只有表伴随结果和目的两种用法, 其他的个人认为说起来都有点牵强.
不过BRAVEMBA的看法可以用来理解句意, 俺佩服的NN,赫赫
这题ＯＧ１１解释的最好，是真正的标杆！
protecting应该是由items发出的目的！！
我来补上OG11的解释原文
The underlined part of the sentence begins a phrase describing items of military equipment. I t is awkward and inaccurate of describe items as a method. Replacing the underlined phrase with the participle protecting creates a modifying phrase that clearly explains the purpose of the items of military equipment.
看了那么多NN的讨论，有点晕了。。。可以理解的是，修饰主语的是定语，修饰动词或整个句子的是状语，那么应该如何判断是修饰主语还是其它呢？
og11里说，现在分词对于其要修饰的词的作用：describing or extending its meaning。
偶不会讲，但一看就知道是这么选……
OG11上原文解释为 the participle protecting creates a modifying phrase that clearly explains the purpose of the items of military equipment.
---也就是说此处是表目的的. 现在分词用在句尾只有表伴随结果和目的两种用法, 其他的个人认为说起来都有点牵强.
不过BRAVEMBA的看法可以用来理解句意, 俺佩服的NN,赫赫
刚开始看到NN的讨论,吓了一大跳, 以为我原来的理解错了. 看了这么多,还是同意这个,句尾的现在分词只能做伴随结果/伴随状态/目的->做状语成分, 而不能修饰前面紧邻的名词-->定语成分,两者的功能不同.
混淆两者虽然不影响理解做此题(此题恰巧前句末尾的名词是主语的说明,与主语同类,所以无论是做状语修饰主语还是做定语修饰前面的名词,该句尾分词都可),但却无法解释OG127/OG120里OG说句末的分词不能修饰前面名词了,这两题中主语与分词前的名词不同,如果用加逗号的现在分词修饰前面的名词就造成了做状语修饰主语的结果(OG120E)
tigercaiqunMM,如果,DOING只能修饰S,而不能修饰紧邻的名词的话,
那PREP-17该怎么解释了?(期待回答.我都蒙掉了)
17. The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including there wooden spears that archaeologists believe to be about 400,000 years old.
A. merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in
C. as mere meat scavengers, has emerged from examining tools found in
D. mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in
E. mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in
答案为E,句末INCLUDING明显是修饰邻近N的中心词"TOOLS",不可能修饰主语the ne image吧?
答案为E,句末INCLUDING明显是修饰邻近N的中心词"TOOLS",不可能修饰主语the ne image吧?
回楼上苏菲娃娃MM, PREP-17这道题里,句末的including是介词,不是现在分词, Longman上的解释:
The price is £25.50, including postage and packing.You'll need a variety of skills, including leadership and negotiating.谢谢tigercaiqunMM,明白了^^
逗号后面的分局修饰前面的某一个名词，shields或者items（他们指的同一个事物），所以是定语。
protecting和to protect都表示有这个目的并且发出动作。
但是区别是protecting是强调shields发出动作，但不是发出目的，目的是人发出的，shields本身不能有目的。
to protect除了表示shields发出动作外，还表示了很强的主观目的的意思。而目的是人发出的，shields本身没有目的。所以错。
另外，用used to protect就对，既表示shields发出动作，又表示人发出目的。
逗号后面的分局修饰前面的某一个名词，shields或者items（他们指的同一个事物），所以是定语。
protecting和to protect都表示有这个目的并且发出动作。
但是区别是protecting是强调shields发出动作，但不是发出目的，目的是人发出的，shields本身不能有目的。
to protect除了表示shields发出动作外，还表示了很强的主观目的的意思。而目的是人发出的，shields本身没有目的。所以错。
另外，用used to protect就对，既表示shields发出动作，又表示人发出目的。
再起高楼。本来一直是赞成“定语说”的，但是这样以来就有一个心结始终无法解开：现在分词在句尾，有逗号隔开，依据什么来判断是作状语还是定语，依据什么来判断有无歧义，显然没有一个明确的说法。
直到今天翻了《薄冰高级英语语法》，看到里面有这样一条解释：现在分词可以作前面名词的同位语：
例：He is getting a job tonight driving a truck.
She got a place in a laundry ironing shirts.
根据同位结构的定义，也就是后面部分是对前面的名词部分进行解释说明。这样，觉得有些豁然开朗的感觉，这很能解释这里的情况：protecting短语作为同位结构，解释前面的名词items of military equipment，我觉得这里还很有可能省略了一个重复前面的名词，即shields were items of military equipment, (items) protecting warriors...
这样既消除了我对分词在句尾作非限制性定语的疑惑，也非常符合OG的解释：a modifying phrase that clearly explains the purpose of the items of military equipment.
在语法区里，没有找到有关不定式的小结……
结合自己OG/Prep的笔记，抛砖引玉吧，期待大家的补充。
OG39：不定式不能单独在句末做修饰成分。
P2－122 不定式在GMAT中表示两层含义：1）表示目的，要求有合理的逻辑主语，2）表将来。
把aeoluseros的帖子放在这里，一并看。 http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=23&id=361341
(1) 主句（其中一般动词谓语) + doing 分词，现在分词可能做定语修饰其紧跟名词，也可能做状语修饰主句，此时须考虑现在分词修饰逻辑问题。（无逗号）
(2) 主句（其中是be动词谓语) + doing 分词，现在分词只能做定语修饰其紧跟名词。（无逗号）
(3) 主句（其中一般动词谓语), + doing 分词做状语。（有逗号）
(4) 主句（其中是be动词谓语) ，+ doing 分词，分词做非限定性定语。（有逗号）(1) 主句（其中一般动词谓语) + doing 分词，现在分词可能做定语修饰其紧跟名词，也可能做状语修饰主句，此时须考虑现在分词修饰逻辑问题。（无逗号）
(2) 主句（其中是be动词谓语) + doing 分词，现在分词只能做定语修饰其紧跟名词。（无逗号）
(3) 主句（其中一般动词谓语), + doing 分词做状语。（有逗号）
(4) 主句（其中是be动词谓语) ，+ doing 分词，分词做非限定性定语。（有逗号）恩，我也同意这个，be动词这种没有什么实际意义的词，不可能做伴随，只能是修饰，至于修饰那个，意思其实都是说的通的，看看OG10
和OG11的解释，一个说是修饰shields，一个说是修饰items of military equipment，就说明其实都是一样的
此题就是： A is... Bof C ，这里A,B其实是相等的，修饰那个都一样。
(1) 主句（其中一般动词谓语) + doing 分词，现在分词可能做定语修饰其紧跟名词，也可能做状语修饰主句，此时须考虑现在分词修饰逻辑问题。（无逗号）
我觉得好像这一条不对，没有逗号应该只能做定语修饰前面紧跟的名词。
agree！
. For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, a method to protect warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
(A)
a method to protect
(B) as a method protecting
(C)
protecting
(D)
as a protection of
(E) to protect
我的问题是：
如果把A选项的a method to protect改成methods of protecting 做同位语成分的话正确么？
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |