ChaseDream
标题: the nephew of Pliny the Elder OG256 [打印本页]
作者: jonahyn 时间: 2009-2-7 15:55
标题: the nephew of Pliny the Elder OG256
256. The nephew of Pliny the Elder
wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in
two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(A)
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the
great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(B)
To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two
letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of
Vesuvius.
(C) The
only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the
Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption
of Vesuvius.
(D)
Writing the only eyewitness account, Pliny the Elder’s nephew accounted
for the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian
Tacitus.（E）
(E)
In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder
wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
这道题里对于the nephew of Pliny the Elder的结构很困惑，the Elder据查是形容词，有NN对这一用法再详解一下吗，感激！
[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-7 15:56:34编辑过]
作者: alohabrian 时间: 2009-2-7 16:23
Pliny the Elder，首先the Elder做Pliny的同位语。
其次 the Elder是一个名词结构，由the : 前置限定冠词+ Elder：形容词 构成。
以上。
作者: dingshuaijun 时间: 2009-2-7 20:07
Pliny the Elder 是一个人名
作者: jonahyn 时间: 2009-2-7 21:23
此处的确是一个人名，同时我也发现网上有Pliny the younger这个人的记录。这类人似乎主要是古罗马的人名，下次见怪不怪就好了。如果理解为同位语确实有些说不通。
作者: BASSI 时间: 2011-9-7 21:47
那这题的各个选项都怎么对了，又怎么错了啊。
作者: liuzhenmiao 时间: 2011-11-7 07:00
看了OG上对于A的解释我很想骂娘~~它说A选项表明维苏威火山在两封信里喷发~~坑爹呐，到这题就不管什么常识原则啦？冷静一下看看，E选项最像人话，选了吧~~~~
作者: yolanda9125 时间: 2012-2-11 09:46
OG对A的解释我也表示无语,回答一下ls的ls:
（B）being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius 主语是The nephew of Pliny the Elder，不合逻辑；（D）account for 是固定词组，意思就变成Pliny the elder‘s nephew 是the great eruption of Vesuvius的 原因，不合逻辑；（C）句子开头就应该讲清楚the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius;至于（A）我还是无法认同OG的解释，我也不知道为什么就错了，等哪位nn来补充吧。。
作者: haosir1234 时间: 2012-2-22 14:03
in two letters 有歧义，具体说不出来。
作者: xueluanfei 时间: 2013-1-10 08:00
不得不顶，我也觉得OG A 的解释去你妹的！！！
In引导的介词短语岂不是都容易有歧义了？看来以后做题要小心
感觉verbal 上的题都很极品啊哈做一道坑一道
作者: bacchos 时间: 2013-5-10 11:55
同求大神解答。。。。
作者: peterlongzhang 时间: 2013-7-16 14:39
A的错误在于介词短语短语的位置，great eruption (of Vesuvius) in two letters 去掉括号里的更清楚一点，in two letters修饰了eruption，就是说在火山在信里面喷发
作者: error703 时间: 2014-9-28 17:46
OG说的不好，但是是有道理的。因为In two letters这个状语是修饰wrote这个动词，所以要么放在句首，要么放在wrote后面。放在eruption后面的确不是最恰当。
作者: susieoyj 时间: 2015-7-14 20:21
liuzhenmiao 发表于 2011-11-7 07:00 
看了OG上对于A的解释我很想骂娘~~它说A选项表明维苏威火山在两封信里喷发~~坑爹呐，到这题就不管什么常识原 ...
同意！
作者: HayleyShen 时间: 2016-3-1 12:19
看一下！
作者: Jun324 时间: 2016-8-30 17:24
个人感觉把in two letters to the historian Tacitus这个状语提前，整个句子读起来更清爽一些……于是就这么稀里糊涂的选了
作者: MAXFIN 时间: 2016-9-8 10:42
我觉得 in two letters 确实有歧义啊。。本来sc 就是选更优而不是最优，从意思的表达来看e 更符合逻辑。
作者: MAXFIN 时间: 2016-9-8 11:14
刚翻了一下曼哈顿，
In general, if a preposition immediately follows a noun, then the prepositional phrase modi- fies that noun.
所以in two letters 直接跟在the eruption of v 后面看起来像是在直接修饰 the eruption of v ，提前的话会更清晰
类比一下，同样是noun modifiers
Jim biked along an old dirt road to get to his house, which cut through the woods.
To get to his house, Jim biked along an old dirt road, which cut through the woods.
第二个句子，调整了修饰成分 的位置，表意更清晰了
作者: ClarkXiao 时间: 2016-11-18 21:07
看来这是道历史难题啊 我正好做到这道，看OG这点到即止的讲解都快
了，还好已经有大神解决了
作者: blaustein 时间: 2016-12-5 11:46
刚刚看到这题，看完OG的解释就崩溃了！我特么怎么可能在考场上这么短的时间内反应出来火山是在两封信里面爆发！
作者: 御寒 时间: 2017-1-21 13:00
同意！
作者: 御寒 时间: 2017-1-21 13:02
同意！
作者: Irinayy 时间: 2017-2-15 15:59
这题我也选错A
，下面是从Manhattan 搬来的nn解释，希望能一起受益。
Since you have posted a doubt on C and E, lets consider choices A, C, and E only:
Meaning Analysis - (Choice A)
• The sentence talks about a person X - who is nephew of Pliny the Elder
• Person X wrote the only eyewitness account.
• This account is of the great eruption of Vesuvius
• He wrote the account in two letters
• The letters were written to the historian Tacitus
Errors Analysis of Choice A
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
Logically the modifier in “red” should provide additional information about the action – wrote – where did he write this only eyewitness account. But its placement after “eruption of Vesuvius” implies that the “eruption took place in two letters”. This is illogical. This is the error in choice A.
Answer Choice Analysis – Choice C
The only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
First of all this choice only communicates partial meaning:
• It is not clear that the “only eyewitness account” is of the great eruption of Vesuvius”. This sentence seems to imply that the ONLY eyewitness account is in the letters that contain an account of the eruption of Vesuvius. This is clearly not what we want to communicate. We want to talk specifically about the ONLY eyewitness account of eruption of Vesuvius.
Secondly, the expression “nephew …writing to the historian Tacitus..” non-sensically describes the nephew and somehow gives the sense that the nephew is still writing the letters. This should instead express a one- time action done by the nephew.
Answer Choice Analysis – Choice E
In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
This sentence correctly communicates the meaning.
Your statement that "nephew of Pliny the Elder" seems to refer to historian Tacitus.” is not correct. Note that the modifier is not “historian Tacitus”. The complete modifier is “in two letters to the historian Tacitus”. Now this prepositional modifier provides more information about the action – wrote. Where did the nephew write? In the 2 letters to historian Tacitus.
I hope this answers your questions.
Take-away
– Focus on the meaning of the sentence and pay close attention to how the sentence structure of the sentences.
作者: danielsu 时间: 2017-6-20 10:14
同意！
作者: Jez 时间: 2017-7-30 00:07
a选项的解释确实...第一遍都没看懂，脑袋默认in two letters 修饰wrote了。
看nn的解释明白啦！mark一下
作者: NIckWDX 时间: 2017-8-2 21:42
个人理解：
根据英文句子，主句提供核心信息：
A The nephew wrote sth. to Tacitus.
B the nephew wrote two letters +修饰letters
“ The nephew of Pliny the Elder” 这个人，写了一件很重要的事情“the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius”.
作者: NIckWDX 时间: 2017-8-2 21:49
个人理解， 希望大家批评指正：
根据英文句子，主句提供核心信息，下面是各个选项的主句 (sth. 代表“the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius”.)
A The nephew wrote sth. to Tacitus.
B the nephew wrote two letters +修饰letters
C sth. is in letters by the nephew …
D the nephew counted for sth. in letters.
E The nephew wrote sth.
E的主句表达了 --“ The nephew of Pliny the Elder” 这个人，写了“the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius”. --这件事情。比其他4项更清晰
作者: Sadaharuharu 时间: 2017-12-12 14:58
同意！
作者: 小武怒熊 时间: 2017-12-19 16:33
我来做一个总结吧，首先同意Manhattan上关于AE 的解释，他是从语义的角度出发的，我把他翻译成大家熟悉的语法点，这样就可以很好的方便大家理解。
首先有一个语法点需要了解：
介词短语（与先行词之间不用逗号隔开）--做限制性定语
介词短语（与主句或先行词之间用逗号隔开）-- 做非限制性定语
举例：
Girls to be beautiful learn piano. 语义：为了变漂亮的女孩学钢琴
Girls, to be beautiful, lean piano. 语义：女孩儿，为了变漂亮，学钢琴-----翻译成正规中文：为了变漂亮，女孩学钢琴。
很明显，没有逗号相间隔的to be beautiful 把女孩儿“限制了”，把女孩儿分成了为了变漂亮的，和不为了变漂亮的！（这里希望大家可以好好理解一下），而加了逗号的介词短语，实际上有非限制性定语从句的一半状语的属性，通过最后的翻译，可以理解！
因此这道题，in two letters to the historian Tacitus. 同样的道理！！
A中，这个介词短语做限制性定语，把eye witness account of eruption of V分类成了，可以write in two letters和无法write in two letters。显然这个account有历史的独特性，是某大侄子写的，所以不能被分类，是特有的。所以A是错的
（就像有一道题big bang theory无法做universe的限制性定语，因为universe无法被分成可以被big bang theory和不能被解释的一样）
E中，把介词短语放在句首，做非限制性定语，有状语成分，则不影响the only eye witness account 的正常表述。
作者: eatnoodle！ 时间: 2018-1-3 14:55
同意！
作者: southernbeast 时间: 2018-4-6 16:19
同意28楼的解答，所谓歧义的解释我觉得很牵强，限制性修饰和非限制性的修饰倒是更有道理
作者: dddaisyyy 时间: 2018-7-14 21:14
liuzhenmiao 发表于 2011-11-7 07:00
看了OG上对于A的解释我很想骂娘~~它说A选项表明维苏威火山在两封信里喷发~~坑爹呐，到这题就不管什么常识原 ...
我也是看了og的解释想骂娘... 啊！
作者: JuliaC2017 时间: 2018-8-25 19:32
Mark一下！
作者: JuliaC2017 时间: 2018-8-25 19:33
Mark一下！
作者: 招拆猫猫拳 时间: 2018-11-6 23:53
不觉得介词短语也是一样的情况 介词短语不能归为限制性短语和非限制性短语 曼哈顿的解释没毛病
作者: 杰西卡会考700 时间: 2019-9-14 16:35
同意！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |