Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.
(A) imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend
(B) imposing stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending
(C) that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each
(D) that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending
(E) that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending
D中spending less time with each 的逻辑主语从语法上来讲是plan, plan (that) require doctors to see more patients, spending less time with each.
那不是不通了么, plan如何spend less time with each 呢
恩 兄弟说的有道理, 某位NN曾经这样总结过, 但这种状况下spending的逻辑主语应该为前面整个句子所表达的状态, 而不是句子里的某一个单词
如Dust from the streets seems to cling to the drab wooden buildings, emphasizing the faded quality of life.
是说灰尘站在了还无生气的木屋上, 这件事更加突出了生活的惨淡
可是这里spending less time with each 逻辑上的主语只能是doctor. 而不能是整个句子plan require doctor to see more patients, spending less time with each.
再问
spending less time with each
注意是each啊 这句话所表达的状况是针对patients和doctors两方面的 窃以为并没有明确的逻辑主语
就是分词在句末作结果状语 叙述plan的结果 可能不是很严密的结果状语 但是意思是这样的
如果逻辑主语是doctor doctor怎么会和doctor spend less time 呢
应该是和patient啊
如果逻辑主语是doctor doctor怎么会和doctor spend less time 呢
应该是和patient啊
谢谢MM!!
不过觉得doctor spend less time 说的通... 还有each 指patient也蛮合适么
谢谢版大!!
我也觉得spending修饰to see more patients, 逻辑主语是doctors
但这里句子谓语为require, to see more patients 是动词不定式做宾补 doctor 还是个宾语
感觉与通常做伴随的情况下 分词的动作与主句谓语并列 逻辑主语为主句主语 差距很大
不过也只能这样理解啦
如果改为require that doctors see more patients, spending less time... 那就逻辑主语就是主句主语 spending 与see对应... 才是通常的伴随吧...
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |