ChaseDream
标题: 再问黄og11/222(虽然已看过讨论帖) [打印本页]
作者: jackiexucd 时间: 2007-4-3 09:16
标题: 再问黄og11/222(虽然已看过讨论帖)
222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central
Intelligence Agency broad discretionary(任意的,自由决定的) powers enabling it
to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of
intelligence information.
(A) enabling it to withhold from the public
(B) for it to withhold from the public
(C) for withholding disclosure to the public of
(D) that enable them to withhold from public disclosure
(E) that they can withhold public disclosure of
以前的帖子好想没有说到关于ing分词逻辑主语指代的问题。这里前面有2个逻辑主语,supreme court和central
intelligence agency,虽然从意思上可以理解enabling指的是后者,但是从语法上难道没有逻辑主语指代不清的嫌疑吗?
以前的精华帖好想都说到,使用ing分词的时候,一定要很注意逻辑动作的发出者,如果前面又个逻辑主语,就不能用ing分词了。
或者说,在ing分词的使用中,其实没有这条定律?其逻辑主语只要逻辑意思上正确就可以了?
请指教
作者: Hae 时间: 2007-4-3 16:03
本来想在看过第二遍OG以后再问问题,不过看到这个帖子就支持一下.
另外我想问一下,为什么说题号是222,11版OG上它是93题啊?是以10版OG为标准的吗?
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |