ChaseDream
标题: [求助]请教fewer of用法 [打印本页]
作者: dreadpower 时间: 2004-1-2 22:18
标题: [求助]请教fewer of用法
在XDF听课笔记上摘录了这么一句话:Fewer of 必错 less of 或者 more of 修饰前面状语
我在GEMJ编的SC大全,RC大全和CR大全中搜索了一遍,几乎没有用Fewer of 的,只有在CR中找到两个例子(举其中一个):At meals that included alcohol, relatively more of the total calories consumed came from carbohydrates and relatively fewer of them came from fats and proteins.
因此产生了一些疑问,fewer of 这个表达对吗??
还可参见下面的题目:大全164
164.Because natural gas is composed mostly of methane, a simple hydrocarbon, vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel.
(A) less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel
(B) fewer of certain pollutants than burning gasoline or diesel fuel do
(C) less of certain pollutants than gasoline or diesel fuel
(D) fewer of certain pollutants than does burning gasoline or diesel fuel
(E) less of certain pollutants than those burning gasoline or diesel fuel
答案是E。比如把E选项的less of改为fewer of ,对吗???
作者: turtlechen 时间: 2004-1-3 02:26
版主所說這題甚是有趣!
在我常用的那本文法書中2.206說到:
通常"less of" 與單數和不可數名詞連用,"fewer of"與複數名詞連用,"more of" 與所有三類名詞連用。
又說道:"less of" 有時用來代替"fewer of" 但許多人認為這種用法不正確。
而本題卻是違背了常用原則。
不過利用google 搜尋一下又發現。pollutant 雖為可屬名詞,用less與 few來修飾的人都有。
足見解題之關鍵不在這,
而是 E 的 those = vehicles 使得比較對象同類
作者: dreadpower 时间: 2004-1-3 15:03
我的疑惑主要不是在为什么选E上,只是在于fewer of 和less of的区别,还有就是XDF笔记:“Fewer of 必错 less of 或者 more of 修饰前面状语”这句话的可信度。
谢谢你的解答!
作者: turtlechen 时间: 2004-1-3 16:15
是啊!這很有趣!
以前背文法是記 few of 接可數,less of 接不可數。
現在看來 less of 都可以接,這條規則不成立了!
作者: dreadpower 时间: 2004-1-3 17:10
less of 后面可以接可数或不可数,这个以前GEMJ总结过
作者: rabbitbug 时间: 2004-1-3 22:32
M-W 是这样来解释fewer和less得区别: 已经不存在less只能修饰不可数抽象名词的规定了, less也可以修饰可数名词, 但是多用于修饰sums, distances,或者25 words or less这是, M-W的例子. 从解释来看, less和fewer是有区别的, 不是可以互换的. 对于这里的pollutants, ETS是不是认为pollutants是一种sums? 没有办法, 恐怕只能这么理解. 请楼主看看对于这个知识点这样处理是否合适: 如果ETS真的想考你less和fewer的区别, 就记住less可以修饰可数名词的以上几种类型, 其他的, 则用fewer.
请指正!
作者: rabbitbug 时间: 2004-1-3 22:34
补充: 修饰时间hours, less和fewer可以互换.
作者: dreadpower 时间: 2004-1-3 22:42
总结的真好!!!!!!!!!!!!!
作者: jetrong 时间: 2004-1-4 00:43
不好意思,我看了这么多年的英文,好像重来没有看过有fewer of ,如果让我选我第一个排除的答案就是B和D!
今天看各位的讨论,受益很多!
作者: gemj 时间: 2004-1-5 04:45
google上搜索来的:
Fewer or Less?
Use fewer with objects that can be counted one-by-one.
Use less with qualities or quantities that cannot be individually counted.
Incorrect: There were less days below freezing last winter.
Correct: There were fewer days below freezing last winter.
(Days can be counted.)
Correct: I drank less water than she did.
(Water cannot be counted individually here.)
When referring to time or money, less is normally used even with numbers. Specific units of time or money use fewer only in cases where individual items are referred to.
Examples:
I have less than an hour to do this work.
I have less time to this work.
I have less money than I need.
I have less than twenty dollars.
He worked fewer hours than I did.
The only occasion in which you might say, "I have fewer than twenty dollars," would be when you were talking about specific dollar bills or coins, such as "I have fewer than twenty silver dollars in my collection."
作者: gemj 时间: 2004-1-5 04:50
以下是引用dreadpower在2004-1-2 22:18:00的发言:
我在GEMJ编的SC大全,RC大全和CR大全中搜索了一遍,几乎没有用Fewer of 的,只有在CR中找到两个例子(举其中一个):At meals that included alcohol, relatively more of the total calories consumed came from carbohydrates and relatively fewer of them came from fats and proteins.
因此产生了一些疑问,fewer of 这个表达对吗??
既然出现过,那就可以这么用啊。
“公理”是有百害而无一益。尤其是一些毫无根据的自称为公题的东西。
作者: cissy 时间: 2004-1-5 17:24
总结得好啊!顶!
作者: sv2000 时间: 2005-1-8 16:59
搞明白啦
作者: Ichase 时间: 2005-6-6 04:35
few and little's comparative formation is less. it does not care with the few and fewer in this sentence. and fewer is also can use as little. so that is why fewer is not point in this sentence.
作者: jjll 时间: 2005-9-30 14:03
以下是引用dreadpower在2004-1-2 22:18:00的发言:
在XDF听课笔记上摘录了这么一句话:Fewer of 必错 less of 或者 more of 修饰前面状语
我在GEMJ编的SC大全,RC大全和CR大全中搜索了一遍,几乎没有用Fewer of 的,只有在CR中找到两个例子(举其中一个):At meals that included alcohol, relatively more of the total calories consumed came from carbohydrates and relatively fewer of them came from fats and proteins.
因此产生了一些疑问,fewer of 这个表达对吗??
还可参见下面的题目:大全164
164.Because natural gas is composed mostly of methane, a simple hydrocarbon, vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel.
(A) less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel
(B) fewer of certain pollutants than burning gasoline or diesel fuel do
(C) less of certain pollutants than gasoline or diesel fuel
(D) fewer of certain pollutants than does burning gasoline or diesel fuel
(E) less of certain pollutants than those burning gasoline or diesel fuel
答案是E。比如把E选项的less of改为fewer of ,对吗???
我想前一句的fewer和后一句的less的词性是不同的,这也是为什么前一句可以用fewer的原因。前面的fewer是代词,把后面的of them去掉不影响,而后句的less of是限定词,certain pollutants不能去。在做限定词时似乎只有less of这一种用法,而没有fewer of。
作者: Ropis 时间: 2005-10-7 21:54
牛。。
作者: psycheyaoyao 时间: 2005-11-6 16:03
白勇说fewer修饰人的,不知道是否可用来做解释,呵呵
作者: puppytiger 时间: 2005-11-9 23:30
ding...
作者: sun_luna 时间: 2006-4-19 23:46
米国人也很为难啊!
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/04/02/less_is_more/
作者: 追逐梦想2006 时间: 2006-7-18 00:40
以下是引用gemj在2004-1-5 4:45:00的发言:
google上搜索来的:
Fewer or Less?
Use fewer with objects that can be counted one-by-one.
Use less with qualities or quantities that cannot be individually counted.
Incorrect: There were less days below freezing last winter.
Correct: There were fewer days below freezing last winter.
(Days can be counted.)
Correct: I drank less water than she did.
(Water cannot be counted individually here.)
When referring to time or money, less is normally used even with numbers. Specific units of time or money use fewer only in cases where individual items are referred to.
Examples:
I have less than an hour to do this work.
I have less time to this work.
I have less money than I need.
I have less than twenty dollars.
He worked fewer hours than I did.
The only occasion in which you might say, "I have fewer than twenty dollars," would be when you were talking about specific dollar bills or coins, such as "I have fewer than twenty silver dollars in my collection."
GEMI这段论述,可以被verbal review证实。见:
Forms of comparison."Many forms follow precise constructions.Fewer refers to a specific number, whereas less than refers to a continuous quantity.
Example:
Correct:“There were fewer children in my class this year.”Incorrect:“There were less children in my class this year.”
Correct:“There was less devastation than 1 was told.”Incorrect:“There was fewer devastation
than 1 was told.”
强人只强,可窥见一斑!
作者: shanj 时间: 2006-12-18 15:47
og 107
The adjective little modifies "mass nouns" (e.g., water), which refer to some undifferentiated quantity; the adjective few modifies "count nouns" (e.g., services), which refer to groups made up of distinct members that can be considered individually.
mass nouns 是金山词霸翻译是物质名词,根据og修饰的是无差异的集合含义的名词。
作者: shanj 时间: 2006-12-18 15:47
og 107
The adjective little modifies "mass nouns" (e.g., water), which refer to some undifferentiated quantity; the adjective few modifies "count nouns" (e.g., services), which refer to groups made up of distinct members that can be considered individually.
mass nouns 是金山词霸翻译是物质名词,根据og修饰的是无差异的集合含义的名词。
作者: richardchu86 时间: 2006-12-30 15:18
个人观点,本题中,fewer和less可以用来表达不用的意义:
Fewer表示种类上的‘少’
less表示量上的‘少’
作者: skylinepipi 时间: 2007-9-11 17:22
good point!
作者: sycrwang 时间: 2008-8-9 11:41
fewer 有两种词性, adj ,pron, 无名词
less有名词词性,此题必须用less of , not fewer of (抛开后面比较对象问题)
less of + countable/non-countable 都可。
注意less 和 less of 是不同的,XDF的说法break OG 98
作者: georgetseng 时间: 2008-8-9 12:11
fewer of语法上不能说绝对错。fewer=更少的;fewer of =其中更少的。
fewer of pollutants=更少种pollutants;less of pollutants = smaller amount of pollutants。所以164 E)中用fewer of 显然不行。
比较一下用法:
1) less water; fewer apples: 多少/数量的比较,可数用fewer,不可数用less
2) less pollutants; fewer pollutants: 前者指smaller amount of pollutants; 后者指fewer types of pollutants
3) less of certain pollutants; fewer of certain pollutants: 与2)同。没有人说less certain pollutants或fewer certain pollutants,所以必须得有of。less = smaller amount (or a less degree of); fewer=fewer types。less of的这种用法其实字典(或语法辞典)里都没有特别的解释,可能是因为大家日常用多了形成的,所以只能记住。
作者: Austen1985 时间: 2008-11-9 01:08
Because natural gas is composed mostly of methane, a simple hydrocarbon, vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel.
(A) less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel
(B) fewer of certain pollutants than burning gasoline or diesel fuel do
(C) less of certain pollutants than gasoline or diesel fuel
(D) fewer of certain pollutants than does burning gasoline or diesel fuel
(E) less of certain pollutants than those burning gasoline or diesel fuel
less of 在例句中是修饰emit 的,意思是“较小程度上”less of 和more of , 固定搭配
作者: leopoldshi 时间: 2009-3-5 17:34
我觉得究竟用fewer of 还是 less of 要看你修饰的语义,如果是用在这里,那么排放出来的污染物减少了应该主要指的是废气量的变化,而不是说废气中含有的物质种类减少,所以用来形容气体量的变化应该是用less of才合理。
作者: 天蝎座1107 时间: 2009-3-5 17:43
标题: ls翻出来这么经典的贴
以下是引用leopoldshi在2009-3-5 17:34:00的发言:
我觉得究竟用fewer of 还是 less of 要看你修饰的语义,如果是用在这里,那么排放出来的污染物减少了应该主要指的是废气量的变化,而不是说废气中含有的物质种类减少,所以用来形容气体量的变化应该是用less of才合理。
rt,o(∩_∩)o...
先表扬一下
在做题过程中貌似只要是emit和cost就必用less。虽然fewer也有可能是修饰后面的名词不是要来修饰emit或者cost,但正确答案都给的是把fewer改成less来修饰动词emit或者cost.
其实还是取决于修饰什么了。但是fewer并一定就错,基本上在没有跟动词挨在一起的时候都可以用啊,例如前面例子中的fewer of ...还有and relatively fewer...怎样怎样。还是看fewer前面的动词如果是emit和cost那就要用less了。其他情况看fewer所修饰的名词是可数还是不可数。
[此贴子已经被作者于2009-3-5 17:46:04编辑过]
作者: Iris007 时间: 2009-3-5 17:57
重要观念!!!THX!
(. .)φ
笔记
作者: feitian605 时间: 2009-3-6 17:41
I think here "those" must be the most important test point.
作者: angel_0028 时间: 2009-5-26 10:18
I use "fewer of, correct or not" to search in Google. But there is no answer about "fewer of". They may not use like that.
作者: mary2010 时间: 2010-8-15 22:59
FEW OF PEOPLE
Less of n (除了PEOPLE)
作者: shiwenpp 时间: 2011-3-21 10:29
90. (29271-!-item-!-188;#058&004232)
Diesel engines burn as much as 30 percent less fuel than gasoline engines of comparable size, as
well as emitting far less carbon dioxide gas and far fewer of the other gases that have been
implicated in global warming.
(A) of comparable size, as well as emitting far less carbon dioxide gas and far fewer of the other
gases that have
(B) of comparable size, as well as emit far less carbon dioxide gas and far fewer of the other gases
having
(C) of comparable size, and also they emit far fewer carbon dioxide and other gases that have
(D) that have a comparable size, and also they emit far less carbon dioxide gas and other gases
that have
(E) that have a comparable size, as well as emitting far fewer carbon dioxide and other gases
having
answer is A.
那这里前面用的是emit,后面的fewer of 怎么解释呢?
我想问一下fewer of和fewer less 和less of的区别是什么啊?
作者: emily19990112 时间: 2012-8-23 09:05
thanks
作者: xiaoyinihon 时间: 2017-10-1 13:18
Forward
* first of all, the point is moot, as (e) is the only answer choice whose parallelism is anywhere close to correct. the first part of the parallel structure refers to vehicles; (e) is the only choice in which the second part likewise refers to vehicles.
* fewer of those pollutants and less of those pollutants have different meanings.
the former means that, if you made lists of the pollutants from each of the two sources, then one of the lists would be missing pollutants that were on the other list.
the latter means that both lists would contain the same pollutants, but that the quantities would be lower on one side.
* finally, if a substance or quantity is measured with numbers and units - such as 385 ppm - you generally use "uncountable" constructions. for example, all of the following are correct (and the corresponding constructions with "fewer" are incorrect):
this cd cost less than $15.
i weigh less than 215 pounds / my body weight is less than 215 pounds.
the concentration of co2 in the atmosphere is less than 400ppm.
if you care about the underlying linguistic reason, it's because we aren't literally counting these units; they're merely a convenient representation of the underlying uncountable quantity, such as money, weight, or co2 concentration. if you need even more of a rationale, note that i could weigh 214.24235 pounds, and that the co2 concentration could be 375.239857 ppm; if these were countable things, both of those statements would be absurd.
作者: arpelsx 时间: 2017-10-4 04:28
感觉考点就是 those 。
在国外这么多年,很少看到人用fewer 更别说fewer of了 一般都是less
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |