ChaseDream
标题: 补充材料106 [打印本页]
作者: lingxia 时间: 2003-12-17 04:29
标题: 补充材料106
106. In large doses, analgesics that work in the brain as antagonists to certain chemicals have caused psychological disturbances in patients, which may limit their potential to relieve severe pain.
(A) which may limit their potential to relieve
(B) which may limit their potential for relieving
(C) which may limit such analgesics’ potential to relieve
(D) an effect that may limit their potential to relieve
(E) an effect that may limit the potential of such analgesics for relieving
因为歧义可以排除a,b,d
但是E的用法中,potential of 。。。for relieving 这样的表达正确吗?
用to 不是更好吗?
请教potential 的用法
作者: rt316 时间: 2003-12-17 07:45
问题在their的指代上
作者: tony6 时间: 2004-7-19 18:42
看了以前大家对这题的讨论,都说A、B、C项WHICH会修饰对象不清,可是非限定性定语从句在修饰人的时候不是只能用WHO,WHOM和WHOSE吗?那么WHICH在这里只能指代DISTURBANCES而不会产生修饰对象不清的情况啊。
如果A、B的问题是THEIR的指代不清,那C是不是错在那个所有格上了呢?
请教大家,谢谢。
[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-19 18:44:36编辑过]
作者: bryan0806 时间: 2004-8-28 11:14
以下是引用tony6在2004-7-19 18:42:00的发言:看了以前大家对这题的讨论,都说A、B、C项WHICH会修饰对象不清,可是非限定性定语从句在修饰人的时候不是只能用WHO,WHOM和WHOSE吗?那么WHICH在这里只能指代DISTURBANCES而不会产生修饰对象不清的情况啊。
同意上述看法, 请教大家,谢谢。
作者: berylgirl 时间: 2004-8-29 21:05
以下是引用lingxia在2003-12-17 4:29:00的发言:
106. In large doses, analgesics that work in the brain as antagonists to certain chemicals have caused psychological disturbances in patients, which may limit their potential to relieve severe pain.
(A) which may limit their potential to relieve
(B) which may limit their potential for relieving
(C) which may limit such analgesics’ potential to relieve
(D) an effect that may limit their potential to relieve
(E) an effect that may limit the potential of such analgesics for relieving
因为歧义可以排除a,b,d
但是E的用法中,potential of 。。。for relieving 这样的表达正确吗?
用to 不是更好吗?
请教potential 的用法
个人觉得这里for是表示一种用途.to表目的.不知道有没有道理
作者: bryan0806 时间: 2004-8-30 12:15
推一下4楼的疑问!! 谢谢!!
作者: bryan0806 时间: 2004-8-31 16:26
这楼又高一层了!!
4楼的问题 请大家帮忙
感恩!!
作者: fair_sword 时间: 2004-8-31 16:51
以下是引用tony6在2004-7-19 18:42:00的发言:看了以前大家对这题的讨论,都说A、B、C项WHICH会修饰对象不清,可是非限定性定语从句在修饰人的时候不是只能用WHO,WHOM和WHOSE吗?那么WHICH在这里只能指代DISTURBANCES而不会产生修饰对象不清的情况啊。
如果A、B的问题是THEIR的指代不清,那C是不是错在那个所有格上了呢?
请教大家,谢谢。
正是which 指代了DISTURBANCES ,才不清楚。an effect 指代前面一句话。 不能用which.
作者: bryan0806 时间: 2004-8-31 17:06
感恩!!
原来又错在逻辑性!!
作者: ethyl 时间: 2005-4-6 10:56
标题: potential用法
字典上说potential for dong sth.的意思是“有可能……”,强调可能性
而说a person has the potential to … 的时候,一般意思是有潜力、有能力做某事
A smaller majority also saw its potential for cutting costs in sales and custom supports.
potential for violence
Lemon juice has the potential to damage hair.
作者: but10 时间: 2005-5-29 16:31
which 不能指代句子 so wipe out a,b,c
potential的用法->E
作者: xjlv128 时间: 2006-7-19 09:25
嗯,一般要指代整个句子的时候,就用同位结构
作者: xjlv128 时间: 2006-7-19 09:32
以下是引用ethyl在2005-4-6 10:56:00的发言:字典上说potential for dong sth.的意思是“有可能……”,强调可能性
而说a person has the potential to … 的时候,一般意思是有潜力、有能力做某事
A smaller majority also saw its potential for cutting costs in sales and custom supports.
potential for violence
Lemon juice has the potential to damage hair.
potential someone's or something's ability to develop, achieve or succeed
The region has enormous potential for economic development.
I don't feel I'm achieving my full potential in my present job.
[+ to infinitive]You have the potential to reach the top of your profession.
I think this room has got a lot of potential (= could be very good if some changes were made to it).
----------------------from Cambridge
看不出来区别啊。
觉得这题就是D里面的their指代不清啊
作者: 誓不低头的重生 时间: 2006-10-6 23:25
关于their指代不清的问题:
指代的优先级:主句主语>主句宾语>从句主语>从句宾语
their在这里指代 analgesics不会引起汉语意思上的歧义啊 ?
也符合指代优先级啊
作者: lichabrend 时间: 2008-7-1 14:32
up
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |