ChaseDream

标题: OG 54 [打印本页]

作者: motorola00 时间: 2003-12-16 00:47
标题: OG 54
54. 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 a person standing on land.
(A) water as a
(B) water as to a
(C) water; just as it would to a
(D) water, as it would to the
(E) water; just as to the

C and D unnecessarily repeat “would” and wrongly use the singular it to refer to the plural phenomena. C and E each contain a faulty semicolon and produce errors in idiom, the same to X just as [it would] to.

请问 C and D ONLY unnecessarily repeat “would”, i personally think c and d unnecessarily repeat "it would" rather than "would". "it would"不是要省一起省吗？？

作者: motorola00 时间: 2003-12-16 16:22
who can help??

作者: carawayt 时间: 2003-12-16 16:55
这道题你不用把它这么复杂化的，其实也就是一个对称的问题：

the same (to...) as (to...)

有时候不能钻牛角尖的哦：）

作者: 小女公子 时间: 2005-4-6 15:17

以下是引用motorola00在2003-12-16 0:47:00的发言：
54. 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 a person standing on land.
(A) water as a
(B) water as to a
(C) water; just as it would to a
(D) water, as it would to the
(E) water; just as to the

C and D unnecessarily repeat “would” and wrongly use the singular it to refer to the plural phenomena. C and E each contain a faulty semicolon and produce errors in idiom, the same to X just as [it would] to.

请问把would删了，it单复改了，CD就可以了吗？

water，just as they to a

我怎么觉得不对？？

作者: 三脚猫 时间: 2005-4-6 21:06

我觉得也不对，the same...as ...是个固定用法，不能用分号隔开的

作者: peajack 时间: 2005-5-22 21:07

请问把would删了，it单复改了，CD就可以了吗？

water，just as they to a

我怎么觉得不对？？

wordy

作者: ring_cheng 时间: 2005-5-29 15:26

water（，just） as （they） to a

括号部分删掉一点歧义也没有，当删之。

另外请教一下：Because A lacks the preposition to, it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land. 这句话如何理解？

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-29 15:27:04编辑过]

作者: EASYSUMMER 时间: 2005-6-12 12:03
原来的意思是人和人比，现在成了现象和想象比了！

作者: ring_cheng 时间: 2005-6-23 21:38

it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land.

再请问that of a person 中的that是指代前面的the appearance吗？如果是这样的话，这句话岂不是说“把自然现象的发生比作人的发生”？

可是原句好像并不是这个意思：

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 a person standing on land.

好像应该翻译成：自然现象的发生跟人一样。

原来的意思是人和人比，现在成了现象和想象比了！

不懂，能不能再请解释解释？谢谢啦。

作者: 薰衣紫草 时间: 2005-6-24 06:45

这句话还是要从伽俐略关于"物体相对运动原理"来解释. 大家都知道当一个物体运动的时候, 从他的参照物 (静止的物体)的角度来讲, 他在运动. 但如果从那个运动物体本身来讲, 运动的就是那个参照物. 所以运动是相对的.

原文就是要表述这个物理现象. 所以句子的结构理当如此.

作者: ring_cheng 时间: 2005-6-24 07:37

谢谢紫草MM的回复！你的意思我明白。

可否再请翻译一下A中的原句意思呢？

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 a person standing on land.

作者: 薰衣紫草 时间: 2005-6-24 07:54

Because A lacks the preposition to, it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land.

原文当然要试图正确表达这个物理现象. ETS对A的解释是:

如果有to, 那就是状语跟状语的比较: to someone ... vs. to a person ....

如果没有to, 那就是主语跟主语的比较: natural phenomena would appear the same as a person ... would appear. ETS把其转化成文字就是compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land. that在这里指代appear, 其实就是将a person...would appear换了种表达, 即用appearance n. 来取代appear vt.

作者: ring_cheng 时间: 2005-6-24 14:03
明白了，多谢紫草MM！

作者: dengpeiqi 时间: 2005-8-21 17:03
妙！解析得太好了

作者: brissa 时间: 2005-9-12 09:34

以下是引用薰衣紫草在2005-6-24 7:54:00的发言：

Because A lacks the preposition to, it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land.

原文当然要试图正确表达这个物理现象. ETS对A的解释是:

如果有to, 那就是状语跟状语的比较: to someone ... vs. to a person .... 这里应该是宾语的比较吧？状语是修饰谓语动词的，而宾语是谓语动词的对象。

如果没有to, 那就是主语跟主语的比较: 应该是宾语和主语的比较吧

natural phenomena would appear the same as a person ... would appear. ETS把其转化成文字就是compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land. that在这里指代appear, 其实就是将a person...would appear换了种表达, 即用appearance n. 来取代appear vt.

对比较结构不甚了解，所以斗胆置疑一下牛mm

另外想请问，og说C and D unnecessarily repeat would

这是否是说比较结构中，因为比较的是名词而不是动词，所以前半句比较使用了would(would appear), 那么后半句的比较中就可以省略动词would appear了？

即natural phenomena the same would appear to someone on the deck.....as would appear to a person standing.....这个结构中重复用would 才对？

作者: toefl2u 时间: 2005-9-17 00:59

C and E each contain a faulty semicolon and produce errors in idiom, the same to X just as [it would] to.

请问这里的errors指的是什么？并同问楼上的问题。谢谢！

作者: wingkim 时间: 2005-9-19 22:40

errors are "the same to X just as to Y;

1、如果有to, 那就是状语跟状语的比较: to someone ... vs. to a person .... 这里应该是宾语的比较吧？状语是修饰谓语动词的，而宾语是谓语动词的对象。

我认为是介賓短語做状语。

2、比较非主语、谓语部分，主语和谓语部分都不需要重复。

作者: 司香尉 时间: 2006-3-11 14:51

以下是引用薰衣紫草在2005-6-24 7:54:00的发言：

Because A lacks the preposition to, it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land.

原文当然要试图正确表达这个物理现象. ETS对A的解释是:

如果有to, 那就是状语跟状语的比较: to someone ... vs. to a person ....

恩，我也觉得有to的话，应该是宾语和宾语的比较

后面MM关于没有to的阐述，精彩！

作者: elaineyin819 时间: 2007-8-29 02:17

这里应该是状语的比较!

当比较从句和主句的主语谓语都一直时,可以全部删除, 只保留介词短语/状语(状语可以直接比较)

The phenomena would appear the same to someone…as to a person…

介词短语to someone/a person做的是状语

作者: tigercaiqun 时间: 2008-2-26 22:36
感觉还是薰衣紫草说的在理儿.

作者: zhechen016 时间: 2010-3-23 10:44

这句话还是要从伽俐略关于"物体相对运动原理"来解释. 大家都知道当一个物体运动的时候, 从他的参照物 (静止的物体)的角度来讲, 他在运动. 但如果从那个运动物体本身来讲, 运动的就是那个参照物. 所以运动是相对的.

原文就是要表述这个物理现象. 所以句子的结构理当如此.

-- by 会员薰衣紫草 (2005/6/24 6:45:00)

姐姐好..
不过这个句子的意思我认为是讲的"这样一个自然现象,就是自然规律对不管是在坐船在水面上滑行还是站在地面上不动的人来说,棋表现都是一样的"

作者: 游吟者 时间: 2010-8-10 17:24

-- by 会员薰衣紫草 (2005/6/24 6:45:00)

-- by 会员 zhechen016 (2010/3/23 10:44:07)

同意，我也觉得是这个意思，自然规律对X和Y来说，是一样的

作者: Mandy2010 时间: 2011-3-2 22:11
偶觉得这句话应该这样理解：伽利略确信（was convinced）,自然现象，作为一种物理定律的表现，无论对于站在匀速（uniformly）平稳运动在水中的船甲板上的人，还是对于站在陆地上的人，所呈现出来的表现是相同的。这里所谓的表现相同，正好印证了偶们初中物理学过的一个定律（伽利略首先发现的惯性定律）：“一切物体都有保持静止状态或匀速直线运动状态的性质，我们就把物体所拥有的这种性质称为惯性”。也就是说，在匀速平稳运动的甲板上，和在陆地上观察到的物体的运动规律，应该是无差异的。没有力作用时，都会因惯性保持原有的状态，有力作用时，都会获得同样的加速度。设想一下，如果将物体放在一艘颠簸的或者非匀速行驶的船上，跟将物体放在一个静止的平面上，观察到的物体运动肯定是不同的。我个人感觉这句话主要是想表达这样一个意思。欢迎大家指正！

作者: yangyuxuan0425 时间: 2011-5-11 10:47
牛人！！解得很好哈！让我终于想通了！谢谢啦！

作者: 我要喝可乐 时间: 2015-12-20 13:11
对于选项A产生的歧义还是不太明白。

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