ChaseDream

标题: 关于形容词并列的一个小问题![求助] [打印本页]

作者: 八戒 时间: 2004-1-10 21:22
标题: 关于形容词并列的一个小问题![求助]
请教一个问题:

37. While some academicians believe that business ethics should be integrated into every business course,others say that students will take ethics seriously only if it would be taught as a separately required course.
(A) only if it would be taught as a separately required course
(B) only if it is taught as a separate, required course
(C) if it is taught only as a course required separately
(D) if it was taught only as a separate and required course
(E) if it would only be taught as a required course, separately

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
(A) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
(B) doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known to orbit
(C) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known in orbit around
(D) doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
(E) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known that orbit

上面是两道OG的题目,答案都没有问题.

只是我觉得很奇怪的就是:
在上述两道题目中两个形容词并列不用加and,而直接用逗号就可以了?
这种是什么用法呀?

还请多多指教!

不胜感激呀!

作者: donna 时间: 2004-1-10 22:20
个人看法：

可以的，因为这里的结构是形容词，分词加名词。此处的分词与名词的关系紧密。
比如这里a separate, required course，中心词是 course，此处首先要求其是required course，然后再要求separate

如果用and就是并列关系，没有紧密之分。

记得以前讲过形容词修饰名词有关系紧密的区分。

我主要讲他们的区别，至于考试中有的时候还是可以通用的。不会分那么清楚的！！！

作者: 八戒 时间: 2004-1-11 11:23

以下是引用donna在2004-1-10 22:20:00的发言：
个人看法：

可以的，因为这里的结构是形容词，分词加名词。此处的分词与名词的关系紧密。
比如这里a separate, required course，中心词是 course，此处首先要求其是required course，然后再要求separate

如果用and就是并列关系，没有紧密之分。

记得以前讲过形容词修饰名词有关系紧密的区分。

我主要讲他们的区别，至于考试中有的时候还是可以通用的。不会分那么清楚的！！！

明白了!

多谢donna ppjj!

你也加油呀!

我说不定和你一起考试呢?

呵......

作者: 八戒 时间: 2004-1-12 12:20
108：Reporting that one of its many problems had been the recent extended sales slump in women's apparel，the seven-store retailer said it would start a three-month liquidation sale in all of its stores.
(A) its many problems had been the recent
(B) its many problems has been the recently
(C) its many problems is the recently
(D) their many problems is the recent
(E) their many problems had been the recent

Answer to Question 108
Choice A is best: the singular pronoun its agrees in number with the singular noun referent retailer; the past perfect verb form had been is used appropriately to refer to action completed prior to the action of the simple past tense said', and the adjective recent correctly modifies the noun phrase extended sales slump. The adverb recently in choices B and C distorts the meaning of the sentence by illogically suggesting that what was recent was only the extension of the slump, and not the slump itself. In choices D and E, the plural pronoun their does not agree with the singular noun retailer.

才找到的一个例子，看来和原来的题目有异曲同工之妙呀！

可见，形容词并列修饰名词的时候，尤其是分词作为形容词修饰名词，组成名词短语，而另外一个形容词则修饰整个名词短语，这个形容词和分词形容词之间可以用逗号隔开也可以不用，根据是否会产生歧义，如果会产生歧义，则应该用逗号隔开。

欢迎大家继续讨论..

作者: nikema 时间: 2004-1-12 15:34
high!

作者: wikeypig 时间: 2004-1-12 16:04
八戒哥哥越来越细了。

作者: KillG8 时间: 2004-1-12 17:16
Exactly. UP

作者: 八戒 时间: 2004-1-12 18:01
多谢大家!

我只是发现OG越看越不明白,越看越糊涂了!!
(真是搞不明白,我以前究竟是怎么看的!!呜.............白花了那么多的时间,一目十行,到头来还是什么都不明白.拿这一些自以为是ETS圣经的东东去光顾了好几回ETS的考场!!真想把ETS踩...踩...再狂踩无数下呀!!!!)

郁闷.......

言归正传吧!

再补充一个OG的例子,形容词并列是会产生歧义的!

112. Domestic automobile manufacturers have invested millions of dollars into research to develop cars more
gasoline-efficient even than presently on the road.
(A) into research to develop cars more gasoline-efficient even than presently on the road
(B) into research for developing even more gasoline-efficient cars on the road than at present
(C) for research for cars to be developed that are more gasoline-efficient even than presently the road
(D) in research to develop cars even more gasoline-efficient than those at present on the road
(E) in research for developing cars that are even more gasoline-efficient than presently on the road

Answer to Question 112
Choice D, the best answer, uses the preposition than to compare two clearly specified and grammatically parallel terms, the cars the manufacturers hope to develop and those at present on the road. In A, the phrase more gasoline-efficient ... than presently on the road does not identify the second term of the comparison. In B, the misuse of modifying phrases produces an ambiguous and awkward statement: even more gasoline-efficient cars could refer either to more cars that are efficient or to cars that are more efficient. Choices B, C, and E all use research for [verb] where the idiom requires research to [verb]. In addition, C awkwardly separates even from more, and C and E again fail to indicate the second term of the comparison.

欢迎大家继续讨论.....

作者: crusaders 时间: 2004-1-13 00:36
even more gasoline-efficient cars could refer either to more cars that are efficient or to cars that are more efficient.
(even more gasoline-efficient cars )
与这相似错误的在OG里面还有几个呢
找ing...

作者: Snazzy 时间: 2004-1-13 00:50
what researchers!

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