ChaseDream

标题: OG12 SC 126 又不懂OG再说神马啊~~ [打印本页]

作者: 坨坨元 时间: 2011-7-26 17:21
标题: OG12 SC 126 又不懂OG再说神马啊~~
126. The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption
that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
that, in turn, create unconscious physiological
responses.

(C) creating, in turn, unconscious physiological
responses
C是错误答案。

OG上说 creating seems to refer back to lying. (正确的是 creating 应该修饰 emotional reactions)
我觉得creating 紧跟在induvidual之后，语法上就是做individual 的后置定语。
那OG是什么意思呢？

作者: bitieming 时间: 2011-7-26 17:40
creating不是individual的后置定语，因为发出create这个动作的应该是emotional recation。另外OG可能是说存在assumption that lying produces... creating...（creating变成that从句中的主语lying的动作）的歧义

作者: 坨坨元 时间: 2011-7-26 20:59
恩恩，我明白你的意思。谢谢~
明确一下，我是说语法上creating可以做individual的后置定语，但逻辑上是错误的。

作者: trackofheart 时间: 2011-10-4 19:07
同求！！！
这是c的解释

C this is construction is less successful at clarifying the chain of events because creating seems to refer back to lying; if used as a participial, creating would have to be preceded by a comma.

后半句说，如果使用分词，creating前面加逗号，加逗号不就更修饰individual了么？按照og的解释，这个句子的错误不是在creating修饰individual，而是错在可能修饰lying，这跟之前说的会有修饰就近原则不是不符合么？

还有上面说的，如果是that 从句里面creating的动作，跟前面的produces不平行啊，而且还需要and连接。

这是怎么回事呢？求高人指教！！！！

作者: sullivan215 时间: 2012-1-10 12:37
同问帮顶！等N人出现指点迷津~

作者: Suri在奋斗 时间: 2012-2-22 23:16
同问~~！！C的解释，哪怕木有逗号，感觉也是错误的修饰了individual，怎么会和og上说的跑去修饰lying了呢

作者: Suri在奋斗 时间: 2012-2-23 15:30
再顶一下

作者: fanlynx 时间: 2012-3-4 19:41
up~~同问啊~现在分词前面没有逗号不是应该修饰紧挨的那个词的吗~~！！！

作者: 皮皮干疯了 时间: 2012-3-10 12:02
帮顶，同问

作者: rocer 时间: 2012-3-10 20:41
我把C选项来来回回看了N遍，感觉有点读懂了GMAC的意思。
以下CMAC关于C选项的解释：
This construction is less successful at
clarifying the chain of events because
creating seems to refer back to lying ; if used
as a participial, creating would have to be
preceded by a comma.

首先，第一句话分析This construction is less successful at
clarifying the chain of events because
creating seems to refer back to lying ——根据 SVO+,v-ing的结构，v+ing修饰逻辑主语,在这句话里即lying，但是这里与逻辑意思不符。
第二句话分析if used
as a participial, creating would have to be
preceded by a comma——但是，这个past participle还不够合格，因为缺一个。

作者: rocer 时间: 2012-3-10 20:44
同时，关于in turn的位置的问题和非就近指代的问题，以下下是个人的看法：

In turn 如果放在中间，那么emotional reactions> unconscious physiological（>表示时间先后的关系）；放在后面，则emotional reactions= unconscious physiological

That/which 跳跃引导定语从句的几种情况：
1、同位语结构。同位语名词+of等介词结构
2、后面跟介词短语作介词短语，n+preposition+….

这几点基本没有争议吧欢迎拍砖

作者: phoebe0624 时间: 2012-3-11 19:43
up！！！

作者: yuha1111 时间: 2012-3-13 00:58
妈的，这题弄了半天，只能心痛的表示，答案是不是要把封号前后两句弄反了，if comma那句在前。按原来没有逗号的结构，creating修饰几百年也修饰不到lying头上去，咱得勇于挑战GMAC狗屎的解释，GMAC全家awkward and wordy...

作者: ClioC 时间: 2012-3-25 12:52

妈的，这题弄了半天，只能心痛的表示，答案是不是要把封号前后两句弄反了，if comma那句在前。按原来没有逗号的结构，creating修饰几百年也修饰不到lying头上去，咱得勇于挑战GMAC狗屎的解释，GMAC全家awkward and wordy...

-- by 会员 yuha1111 (2012/3/13 0:58:01)

真是很久没看到这么给力的评论了。。。。
您老人家威武！

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-4-2 09:52
Receiving a PM, I decide to weigh in.

comma + v-ing
只要comma前面存在完整的clause，就一定是adverbial modifier
如果comma前面不存在完整的clause，就一定是noun modifier （典型例子： Neuroscientists, having amassed ..., are now drawing ...）
以上是毫无争议的定论，参见Ron的讲课、forum发言, e-gmat总结, stacey发言.....

这题，仍然是adverbial modifier
注意Ron总结的是，v-ing针对adverbial modifier针对的是preceding clause （链接在suri发的一个v-ing贴子里）
什么叫做preceding clause? 为什么不叫做main clause?

这题C选项是错误的，按照C选项的说法：
(C). The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual, creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses
Grammatically speaking, "creating ..." serves as an adverbial modifier of the preceding clause "lying produces emotional reactions in an individual" and applies to the subject within that clause ("lying"). Therefore, C is illogical. This is why OG says:
creating seems to refer back to lying

126. The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption
that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
that, in turn, create unconscious physiological
responses.

(C) creating, in turn, unconscious physiological
responses
C是错误答案。

OG上说 creating seems to refer back to lying. (正确的是 creating 应该修饰 emotional reactions)
我觉得creating 紧跟在induvidual之后，语法上就是做individual 的后置定语。
那OG是什么意思呢？

-- by 会员坨坨元 (2011/7/26 17:21:42)

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-4-2 10:00
不好意思，刚才没核对OG，刚发现这题C选项creating前面没有comma
那么，lz没错，"no comma + v-ing" is a noun modifier.
但是作为noun modifier，既可以是修饰"individual"，也可以修饰"emotional reactions in an individual"，往往根据句意来决定修饰什么。

但C选项仍然错，因为逻辑
A的逻辑是个链式关系，正确
而C的逻辑是：on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions (modifiers)

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-4-2 10:12
see Stacey's input here
http://www.beatthegmat.com/lie-detectors-t52139.html

In C, "creating ..." is a noun modifier, but what's the modified noun? Here is an ambiguity.

作者: maomiguaiguai 时间: 2012-5-12 12:09
SVO,doing doing由S发出即伴随状语

作者: teddybearj4 时间: 2012-5-13 10:50
mark一下姐姐高度浓缩总结的Ving的两种情况，顿时豁然开朗！

Receiving a PM, I decide to weigh in.

comma + v-ing
只要comma前面存在完整的clause，就一定是adverbial modifier
如果comma前面不存在完整的clause，就一定是noun modifier （典型例子： Neuroscientists, having amassed ..., are now drawing ...）
以上是毫无争议的定论，参见Ron的讲课、forum发言, e-gmat总结, stacey发言.....

这题，仍然是adverbial modifier
注意Ron总结的是，v-ing针对adverbial modifier针对的是preceding clause （链接在suri发的一个v-ing贴子里）
什么叫做preceding clause? 为什么不叫做main clause?

这题C选项是错误的，按照C选项的说法：
(C). The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption thatlying produces emotional reactions in an individual, creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses
Grammatically speaking, "creating ..." serves as an adverbial modifier of the preceding clause "lying produces emotional reactions in an individual" and applies to the subject within that clause ("lying"). Therefore, C is illogical. This is why OG says:
creating seems to refer back to lying

-- by 会员坨坨元 (2011/7/26 17:21:42)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/4/2 9:52:26)

作者: zwhjzwhj 时间: 2012-6-20 21:22

不好意思，刚才没核对OG，刚发现这题C选项creating前面没有comma
那么，lz没错，"no comma + v-ing" is a noun modifier.
但是作为noun modifier，既可以是修饰"individual"，也可以修饰"emotional reactions in an individual"，往往根据句意来决定修饰什么。

但C选项仍然错，因为逻辑
A的逻辑是个链式关系，正确
而C的逻辑是：on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions (modifiers)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/4/2 10:00:09)

问题是在no comma的情况下，OG说ving它修饰的是lying ！？
because creating seems to refer back to lying; if used as a participial, creating would have to be preceded by a comma.
话说OG这句话实在太高深了。。。我看了这么多讨论分词修饰的帖子都没真正弄明白这句话想表达的意思。

作者: bingblbing 时间: 2012-8-3 07:17
你说得太搞笑了。。。。。。

作者: bingblbing 时间: 2012-8-3 07:19

-- by 会员 yuha1111 (2012/3/13 0:58:01)

我指这位大哥的回复，太有幽默感了

作者: vianfq 时间: 2012-8-7 20:07

-- by 会员 yuha1111 (2012/3/13 0:58:01)

我指这位大哥的回复，太有幽默感了

-- by 会员 bingblbing (2012/8/3 7:19:07)

UP. But still, back to the question:
问题是在no comma的情况下，OG说ving它修饰的是lying ！？

作者: yiqing2012 时间: 2013-2-15 16:05

-- by 会员 yuha1111 (2012/3/13 0:58:01)

我指这位大哥的回复，太有幽默感了

-- by 会员 bingblbing (2012/8/3 7:19:07)

UP. But still, back to the question:
问题是在no comma的情况下，OG说ving它修饰的是lying ！？

-- by 会员 vianfq (2012/8/7 20:07:14)

这位大哥回复的意思是：把这两句到个顺序看，if use as participal,creating would have to be preceded by comma,(but)creating seems to refer back to lying.
大哥一句话，点醒梦中人啊~~~

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