ChaseDream

标题: [讨论]OG90题 [打印本页]

作者: mumuwa    时间: 2004-6-4 19:50
标题: [讨论]OG90题

OG 90题


90.   Since 1986, when the Department of Labor began to allow investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations began paying their investment advisers a small basic fee, with a contract promising higher fees if the managers perform well.


(A) investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations began


(B) investment officers’ fees to be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations began


(C) that fees of investment officers be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations have begun


(D) fees of investment officers to be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations have begunD


(E) that investment officers’ fees be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations began


Choices A, B, and E incorrectly use the past tense began rather than the present perfect; furthermore, in each of these options, they has no referent, since officers is a possessive modifier of fees.


请问:


关于代词“THEY”的指代功能,五个选项中以officers' fees作逻辑主语的THEY都有指代错误;但其他两个选项的主语中心词也是fees,只不过换了一种所属结构,变成fees of officers,为什么后面的THEY就没有指代混淆的问题(我觉得THEY更应该理解为指代FEES,五个选项都应该是)


当句中出现几个非中心词的名词时,如何准确判断代词何时指代正确、何时有指代不清的问题(中心词的名词主语我基本能判断)?



不吝赐教!


作者: 蓝色泡泡    时间: 2004-6-4 20:06

A'B 和  B of A结构是有区别的

前者A除了从属的修饰(所有格)之外没有任何地位,而且在所有格形式下真正的名词A实际上已经带上了' 从而可看作改变了其性质

而后者中A是依旧有被修饰被指代的资格,并且在判断指代或修饰上是否有歧义时

应该首先从逻辑上排除多种解释,能排除的不应该算作有歧义,就如上句的D,应该不会有人从逻辑上误认为是fees在manage吧,毕竟判断一句话是否有效表达,还是该一读者能否有效准确理解上看

而在其他选项中没有复数可以指代了,读者就会不管逻辑是否通顺的去想是不是fees在manage, 再假设没有复数名词的话,代词就成了无指代

个人意见


作者: mumuwa    时间: 2004-6-5 15:17

听起来很有道理啊,佩服!

BTW,关于“在判断指代或修饰上是否有歧义时应该首先从逻辑上排除多种解释,能排除的不应该算作有歧义”,我觉得自己刚开始接触SC时,最新鲜的就是发现OG认为的指代混乱问题,就如你所说的很多代词我会自然而然的排除其他的可能,但OG偏认为那些也是能够产生误解的。

就如上句的D,应该不会有人从逻辑上误认为是fees在manage吧"  既然D可以这样用常识判断,其他选项也应该不会误认吧。

我想最主要的可能还是你说的第一个理由。呵呵,又胡搅蛮缠了一顿,抱歉。


作者: 蓝色泡泡    时间: 2004-6-5 15:52

既然D可以这样用常识判断,其他选项也应该不会误认吧。

是我没有表达完整

在我看来,判断句子应该是这样一个顺序:语法到逻辑再到语法

也就是说,从语法上先判断D有两个可以被代,再用逻辑看,fees不会被误认,所以不算有歧义

而其他选项,在走第一步时,就从语法上把offices的被指代可能给排除了,发现只有fees有可能

再走第二步,逻辑上看产生了错误解释,因此整句话是有问题的

不知道这样说可以吗?


作者: 似水年华    时间: 2004-11-17 11:36

OG 90题

90.   Since 1986, when the Department of Labor began to allow investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations began paying their investment advisers a small basic fee, with a contract promising higher fees if the managers perform well.

(A) investment officers’ fees to be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations began

(B) investment officers’ fees to be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations began

(C) that fees of investment officers be based on how the funds they manage perform, several corporations have begun

(D) fees of investment officers to be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations have begunD

(E) that investment officers’ fees be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations began

在同一个句子里,前一个they指代officers, 后一个their指代corporation, 应该算代词指代有歧义吧?


作者: satom    时间: 2004-11-17 12:55
在同一个句子里,前一个they指代officers, 后一个their指代也应该是OFFICERS.否则是错误的.
作者: tqbiao    时间: 2005-1-10 01:14

officers'  fees ....... they  ,根据就近指代grammer 上指代fees,但逻辑上指代officers所以产生歧义


fees of officers ...... they, 就没有问题了。


我感觉代词指代的就近问题主要还是基于阅读的考虑吧,如果你是读者你在看到代词时也会对他的antecedent产生疑问的吧


(比如一个交色很多的场景武当,少林,华山什么都有,作者老是说他们怎么样,怎么样,你怎么知道作者写了什么呢,)


所以有两点就很自然了,


1,代词指代要统一,比如他们用了一招降龙十八掌, 他们的暗器还是很厉害的,逻辑上我们怎么能知道前面那个是丐帮的,后面那个是唐门的呢?


2。就近原则,如果我在前面说了一堆高手,最后说他是武林盟主,当然应该是最后一个了,否则是哪一个呢?


3。和主语一致原则


可是当2点和3点冲突怎么办呢,还是需要nn指点亚,ets很多题也是怪怪的


[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-10 1:37:53编辑过]

作者: guhuo    时间: 2005-2-22 14:18
标题: [公告]
...since officers is a possessive modifier of fees.
我記得之前看過如果是A's B的形式的話,後面的指代不能代A。所以還是搞不清楚為何這一題可以;雖然我贊成武林盟主的例子,但是…ETS總該給個可行的規則吧,不能一直變來變去的呀!…
作者: brissa    时间: 2005-9-26 22:33

新提一个问题。


就是我发现未划线部分也有个their,而这个their指代corporations,这样一来就跟划线部分的they指代officers,全句指代不一致了。


作者: new_land    时间: 2005-10-18 04:38
以下是引用brissa在2005-9-26 22:33:00的发言:

新提一个问题。


就是我发现未划线部分也有个their,而这个their指代corporations,这样一来就跟划线部分的they指代officers,全句指代不一致了。



good question


是不是因为前面是一个when引导的从句,而在从句中they并不是充当从句的主语(若是从句的主语是代词,此代词必须优先指代主句中的主语),而仅仅是对performance of the funds的限定修饰,即 performance of the funds (that) they manage


故不需要对主句中的主语(corporations)指代(they)一致

90. Since 1986, when the Department of Labor began to allow fees of investment officers to be based on the performance of the funds they manage, several corporations have begun paying their investment advisers a small basic fee, with a contract promising higher fees if the managers perform well.


open to discussion!


作者: mmfoolish    时间: 2005-11-12 13:04
以下是引用brissa在2005-9-26 22:33:00的发言:

新提一个问题。


就是我发现未划线部分也有个their,而这个their指代corporations,这样一来就跟划线部分的they指代officers,全句指代不一致了。



请问这个如何解释?会引起歧义么?望牛牛指教!!!
作者: seasnow    时间: 2005-11-24 02:00
是不是因为他们在不同的句子中(一个从句一个主句),所以可以根据句子意思判断?
作者: zwt8564    时间: 2006-7-19 16:42
同意12楼
作者: denne    时间: 2006-12-19 23:30

真的是12楼说的这样吗?

以前没注意过...

谁能给个定论???


作者: KATIEUS    时间: 2006-12-25 04:04

作者: bloveecho    时间: 2007-1-7 15:07

我想这里的指代不同是因为句子中间的逗号缘故,且一个是物主代词一个是人称代词

在这样的情况下是可以允许其指代内容不同的,可以试找一下OG或大全里的句子几乎符合规律

如果中间是用分号隔开同一个代词就可以指代不同内容不论物主或是人称

9楼MM真细心的说~~


作者: vivian_huang    时间: 2007-8-4 19:09

考点思路分析:

当句中出现如since 类表示自一段时间以来的大段时间概念,则其影响的主句应该使用完成时态;所以,一旦看见句子中有Since等大段时间概念,可以预测划线部分可能存在与其不匹配的主句谓语动词;

 

allow出现在划线部分一般考其习惯搭配
   allow sb to do sth

另外,划线部分出现有A’sB A of B所有格词组作主语,可预测其考点含有对AB的指代问题以及主谓搭配问题;


[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-4 19:09:51编辑过]

作者: ll_422    时间: 2007-8-9 10:21
句子中的物主代词和人称代词可以指代不同的对象
作者: jessywang    时间: 2007-9-20 15:02
上面的问题还是没有大牛回答啊,their 和they 指代

作者: Netherlander    时间: 2008-9-28 10:43

GMAC是有这么一条规律:it 和its,they和their可以指代不同对象


作者: guting109    时间: 2008-10-19 11:24
以下是引用new_land在2005-10-18 4:38:00的发言:

good question

是不是因为前面是一个when引导的从句,而在从句中they并不是充当从句的主语(若是从句的主语是代词,此代词必须优先指代主句中的主语),而仅仅是对performance of the funds的限定修饰,即 performance of the funds (that) they manage

故不需要对主句中的主语(corporations)指代(they)一致

90. Since 1986, when the Department of Labor began to allow fees of investment officers to be based on the performance of the funds they manage,
        several corporations have begun paying their investment advisers a small basic fee, with a contract promising higher fees if the managers perform well.
        

open to discussion!

you are right!!!!thx!!!
作者: piaolf123    时间: 2008-12-22 23:45
以下是引用Netherlander在2008-9-28 10:43:00的发言:

GMAC是有这么一条规律:it 和its,they和their可以指代不同对象

83. Any medical test will sometimes fail to detect

a condition when it is present and indicate that there is one when it is not.

(A)  a condition when it is present and indicate that there is one

(B)  when a condition is present and indicate that there is one

(C)  a condition when it is present and indicate that it is present

(D)  when a condition is present and indicate its presence

(E)  the presence of a condition when it is there and indicate its presence

此题便讨论过,是允许指代不同对象,如DE选项


作者: songlovegt    时间: 2009-1-9 10:56
拜读完毕,支持10楼和Netherlander, 哈哈我是荷兰球迷啊。
In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell, and they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have

The answer is C.their 指代vintner, they 指代主句主语wines
作者: cuishang11    时间: 2009-5-6 12:19

在相对独立的两个句子中,出现同样的代词指代不同的名词,如果逻辑意思上没有歧义,是可以成立的 

记得prep上有好几道这样的题  暂时找不到~~~  呵呵


作者: Hendy    时间: 2014-12-11 06:36
new_land 发表于 2005-10-18 04:38
以下是引用brissa在2005-9-26 22:33:00的发言:新提一个问题。就是我发现未划线部分也有个their,而这个the ...

只有同一个句子中代词指代要一致,but 后边是另外一个句子了
作者: Hendy    时间: 2014-12-11 06:39
同一个句子是指有SVO的,一句话中有多个SVO的是可以不同指代的




欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3