712.The commission acknowledged that no amount of money or staff members can ensure the safety of people who live in the vicinity of a nuclear plant, but it approved the installation because it believed that all reasonable precautions had been taken.
(A) no amount of money or staff members
(B) neither vast amounts of money nor staff members
(C) neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members
(D) neither vast amounts of money nor a large staff（D）
(E) no matter how large the staff or how vast the amount of money
712, sec01-19
In choice A, amount of … staff members is incorrect; amount properly refers to an undifferentiated mass, as in the case of money. Choice B does not make clear whether vast amounts is supposed to describe money only or money and staff members, and in choice C it is not certain whether vast modifies amounts only or amounts and numbers. Choice D is best. Choice E cannot fit grammatically into the original sentence because it supplies no noun that can function as a subject for the verb can. This question is a little more difficult than the average.
我对解释有两个问题：
1.neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members，我觉得很明显vast是修饰 amount的，因为neither连接一个成分，nor接下来连接另一个并列成分。
2.vast是不是只能修饰不可数的成分？我查了字典找不到相关的解释
请大家指教
谢谢石头哥哥！
我想也只能这么去理解了，不然要变成钻牛角尖啦
712.The commission acknowledged that no amount of money or staff members can ensure the safety of people who live in the vicinity of a nuclear plant, but it approved the installation because it believed that all reasonable precautions had been taken.
(A) no amount of money or staff members
(B) neither vast amounts of money nor staff members
(C) neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members
(D) neither vast amounts of money nor a large staff（D）
(E) no matter how large the staff or how vast the amount of money
712, sec01-19
In choice A, amount of … staff members is incorrect; amount properly refers to an undifferentiated mass, as in the case of money. Choice B does not make clear whether vast amounts is supposed to describe money only or money and staff members, and in choice C it is not certain whether vast modifies amounts only or amounts and numbers. Choice D is best. Choice E cannot fit grammatically into the original sentence because it supplies no noun that can function as a subject for the verb can. This question is a little more difficult than the average.
我对解释有两个问题：
1.neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members，我觉得很明显vast是修饰 amount的，因为neither连接一个成分，nor接下来连接另一个并列成分。
很好的问题，二楼的解释可能还没提到要点：
比如这个：Choice B does not make clear whether vast amounts is supposed to describe money only or money and staff members
B选项neither （vast amounts of money） nor （staff members）是个平行的结构，为什么解释说vast amounts 可能会修饰staff members？？？
我猜测这里是neither...nor...的用法问题，请教
不是很明白你的意思，就是因为重视平行，所以才觉得这里有些问题
看B选项的解释：Choice B does not make clear whether vast amounts is supposed to describe money only or money and staff members
这里的疑问是：按照平行的规则，neither...nor...连接的两个并列的平行结构，单纯从平行结构上来看，vast是无论怎样也不能修饰staff的。而现在解释中说到：vast跟在neither后面而不用出现在nor后面，就可以修饰amounts of moeny和staff，我没见过平行结构有这样的规矩。
所以我仍然猜测，这是因为neither...nor...的结构允许这样表达平行：
我翻了语法书：看到一些东西，摘抄这里，虽然可能与这个题目关系不大，但是说明neither...nor...在表示平行结构时候可以用法比较特殊一些：
当neither / either 出现在主动词之前时候，随后的nor / or可带主动词，也可不带，意思无差别
有时neither / either引导了述谓成分，而nor / or能引导整个分句
he neither likes fiction nor (likes) poetry
he neither likes fiction, nor does he like poetry
继续请教
"这里的疑问是：按照平行的规则，neither...nor...连接的两个并列的平行结构，单纯从平行结构上来看，vast是无论怎样也不能修饰staff的。而现在解释中说到：vast跟在neither后面而不用出现在nor后面，就可以修饰amounts of moeny和staff，我没见过平行结构有这样的规矩。"
凡事不要太武断, 没见过绝对不代表没有, 对待科学, 态度要严谨.
首先看一个例子, OG152
152. When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970's, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an "Andromeda strain," a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.
(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it
(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them
(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them
这里答案是C, 很明显, vast numbers of是存在的.
平行的很重要的一条原则就是可以省略相同的部分, C中省略了相同的vast在numbers也是非常合理的. 所以有歧义.
152. When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970's, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an "Andromeda strain," a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.
(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it
(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them
(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them
这里答案是C, 很明显, vast numbers of是存在的.
平行的很重要的一条原则就是可以省略相同的部分, C中省略了相同的vast在numbers也是非常合理的. 所以有歧义.（这句话实在没看懂。。。C哪里省略了vast？？？C又哪里有歧义？？？）
楼上的版版，我想你没理解我的意思，如果你不介意，我真的很希望你以科学的、严谨的态度再仔细的看一下第6楼的全部内容，然后再给予你的一点看法和解释
首先，我并不认为你举的例子能说明什么，我本来就没有否认vast numbers of的合理
此外，我的疑问是平行结构的对称，你举的例子不相关
我的问题是：按照OG提供的解释平行结构：XX kills neither vast A nor B ，此时vast可以同时修饰A和B
按照这个说法，如果句子是这样：XX kills both vast A and B ，这个结构，也可认为vast可以同时修饰A和B？？
如果纯粹按照平行，那么至少应该是：XX kills vast both A and B
因此，我不理解OG的解释，所以我猜测neither ...nor ...结构在表示平行意思的时候可能用法灵活，所以想请教
恩, 我的例子是针对你的 "这里的疑问是：按照平行的规则，neither...nor...连接的两个并列的平行结构，单纯从平行结构上来看，vast是无论怎样也不能修饰staff的。" 这句话说的. OG152中我的例子给出只是说明存在Vast number of这种结构.
大全712中的C的结构是"neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members", 这里面OG理解成在numbers of前面省略了相同的vast, 我认为很关键的原因是numbers在形容数量大的时候, 前面必须要有一个表示程度的形容词, 比如large或者vast, 我查了RC和SC的所有文章和题目, 这个观点是有根据的.
这里的numbers自己一个单独出现, 在语法上面需要一个形容词修饰它, 所以我觉得OG说的是可以理解的.
至于说XX kills both vast A and B, 我觉得你说的对, 应该是变成XX kills vast both A and B, 但是这里的问题不同, 我认为关键的问题在于numbers.
PS.KINGSOFT兄见谅, 我上一篇帖子没有解释清楚.
钦佩于前辈严谨的求知求实态度！
up
恩, 我的例子是针对你的 "这里的疑问是：按照平行的规则，neither...nor...连接的两个并列的平行结构，单纯从平行结构上来看，vast是无论怎样也不能修饰staff的。" 这句话说的. OG152中我的例子给出只是说明存在Vast number of这种结构.
大全712中的C的结构是"neither vast amounts of money nor numbers of staff members", 这里面OG理解成在numbers of前面省略了相同的vast, 我认为很关键的原因是numbers在形容数量大的时候, 前面必须要有一个表示程度的形容词, 比如large或者vast, 我查了RC和SC的所有文章和题目, 这个观点是有根据的.
这里的numbers自己一个单独出现, 在语法上面需要一个形容词修饰它, 所以我觉得OG说的是可以理解的.
至于说XX kills both vast A and B, 我觉得你说的对, 应该是变成XX kills vast both A and B, 但是这里的问题不同, 我认为关键的问题在于numbers.
PS.KINGSOFT兄见谅, 我上一篇帖子没有解释清楚.
说得有道理。kingsoft和这位可能一开始没有聚焦在一个点上。
只能理解成:
1,nor后是省略了和前面的想同部分（vast)
或者
2，vast只是修饰amount
2种理解，所以有歧义。
－－－－－－－
关键相比D，C就算没错，也不如D清楚明白。
In choice A, amount of … staff members is incorrect; amount properly refers to an undifferentiated mass, as in the case of money. Choice B does not make clear whether vast amounts is supposed to describe money only or money and staff members,
and in choice C it is not certain whether vast modifies amounts only or amounts and numbers(这句应该是在说：吃不准C中，“nor后面直接加numbers of..”是不是省略了和前面一样的vast，还是本来就没有vast。因为按照平行法则，numbers前面应该跟一个修饰成分和amount前有个修饰成分对称。－－－所以2个可能，所以歧义了).
Choice D is best. Choice E cannot fit grammatically into the original sentence because it supplies no noun that can function as a subject for the verb can. This question is a little more difficult than the average.
看OG对B的解释，其实B也有类似问题。
Vast amount of是不是只是修饰money呢？还是nor后面省略掉了vast amount of 修饰staff members（如果是，amount也用错了）？
按照平行，nor后面应该是省略了和前文想同的 vast amount of (但是可数名词搭配错）
可是如果解读成"nor后只有memebrs”也算对的。
所以有歧义，相比D，还是D最好。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |