ChaseDream

标题: 那个。。。prep08(part1) 187.。。找不到这个知识点的讨论。。 [打印本页]

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-14 22:22
标题: 那个。。。prep08(part1) 187.。。找不到这个知识点的讨论。。
187.United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.

A.that included

B.which includes

C.including

D.some of which were

E.among them being

正确选项：C~~
饭饭选对了~~但是对D的错误的解释不太懂哎~
C．Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts补丁：（应该就是跳过介词短语修饰中心词吧）。

D．some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。

注：黄色部分是饭饭自己加的布丁。。请问大家：如果C中的including可以跳跃了，那么D中的为什么不可以跳跃。

附：饭饭当初是从简洁角度排除D的。
谢谢大家！

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-14 23:58
manhattan 在subgroup modifier 在介绍过这种用法，describe a part of a larger group with a modifier. some of which 用在这里不太合适，毕竟只有several posts,还用some of which来修饰。

而且跳跃修饰在这里不存在，within是修饰动词were appointed to的，不是post的必要修饰，因此如果用which的话，都就近指代term.

including是介宾结构，虽然也是修饰post,但比起which的指代不清，including直接指向post. what is including？That is post.

最后从直接句子表达来看，including更加符合语言习惯，且表达清晰，不引起歧义。

欢迎大家讨论~~~

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 00:34

manhattan 在subgroup modifier 在介绍过这种用法，describe a part of a larger group with a modifier. some of which 用在这里不太合适，毕竟只有several posts,还用some of which来修饰。

而且跳跃修饰在这里不存在，within是修饰动词were appointed to的，不是post的必要修饰，因此如果用which的话，都就近指代term.

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/14 23:58:16)

谢谢yiayia来帮帮饭饭~~

饭饭没有看manhattan这一章。。。。这就补课去~~~
但是啊yiayia亲~some of which were 其中“were”谓语复数直接排除which指代歧义这一点，可以明确which指代posts，而不是term啊~yiayia觉得呢？

作者: justabeginning 时间: 2012-2-15 01:32
饭饭,哥来支持你了…
这是一个effectiveness的错误
用some of which来指代/修饰时主要要注意一点：它的修饰含义/手法和which一样，也就是说which在指代时会犯的错误some of which也会犯，which适用/不适用的地方some of which同样适用/不适用。
在此题中，如果我们把some of which看成which(注意：只是从结构上来划等号而不是从意思上)，很明显不如including好，因为-ing在逗号后面能跳过很多种结构来修饰且这种跳跃貌似很被出题者喜欢。至于which有时的确可以跳过prep. phrase进行指代但毕竟那是在没有更好的选择下，即不到一些特殊的情况正确答案很少让which跳跃来指代（记得GWD还是prep有一道题有两个选项比较迷惑1，to…from..prep. phrase X, which…. 2，from…to…X prep. phrase, which, 正确选项是1。2中的主要错误是which需要跳过一个prep. phrase来修饰X）
但我觉得这只是一个effectiveness的错误，即假如没有including那个选项some of which也可当作正确答案,（在我刚才举的那个例子中如果没有1，2同样也可以当作正确答案）不过这只是我的观点，谨慎对待

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 07:41

饭饭,哥来支持你了…
这是一个effectiveness的错误
用some of which来指代/修饰时主要要注意一点：它的修饰含义/手法和which一样，也就是说which在指代时会犯的错误some of which也会犯，which适用/不适用的地方some of which同样适用/不适用。
在此题中，如果我们把some of which看成which(注意：只是从结构上来划等号而不是从意思上)，很明显不如including好，因为-ing在逗号后面能跳过很多种结构来修饰且这种跳跃貌似很被出题者喜欢。至于which有时的确可以跳过prep. phrase进行指代但毕竟那是在没有更好的选择下，即不到一些特殊的情况正确答案很少让which跳跃来指代（记得GWD还是prep有一道题有两个选项比较迷惑1，to…from..prep. phrase X, which…. 2，from…to…X prep. phrase, which, 正确选项是1。2中的主要错误是which需要跳过一个prep. phrase来修饰X）
但我觉得这只是一个effectiveness的错误，即假如没有including那个选项some of which也可当作正确答案,（在我刚才举的那个例子中如果没有1，2同样也可以当作正确答案）不过这只是我的观点，谨慎对待

-- by 会员 justabeginning (2012/2/15 1:32:42)

~~~~~~>0<~~~~~~路飞阁阁最好了.....谢谢路飞~

！.....这个贴纸不知道肿么了........昨天就是没人理啊.

.....
饭饭这里明白路飞的意思了：
就是从表达句意修饰有效性这一方面来看：
（1）在非限制性定语修饰名词，被修饰名词和修饰词之间有介词短语酱紫滴结构间隔的时候，V-ing结构做非限制性定语修饰的“跳跃能力”要强于which引导的非限制性定语从句，就是说这个时候V-ing结构的非限制性定语更具有效性。
（2）在 ", which" 引导定语从句结构做非限制性定语修饰的时候，与被修饰词之间最好没有介词短语结构间隔，遵循touch rule是最好的，但这不是绝对性错误。

还有就是some of which等酱紫关于which从句的结构做要注意的语法点是和which相同的~~

明白了~~~饭饭这里谢过路飞~~！

~~~

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 09:16
关于which的跳跃修饰，我的总结是which想要跳跃修饰，
a)被修饰名词后面跟的成分必须是与之非常相关的。
b)而且跳跃修饰不能跳跃超过1个逗号，即which修饰的名词在which逗号前的句子里。

如：OG12 107题
正确句子：
Originally developed for detecting air pullutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission(called...严格限定了a technique),which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine,archaeology,and criminology.
错误句子：
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destorying it.(跳跃修饰超过1个逗号，OG就认为which修饰的是emission了)

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 09:23
yiayia说得没错，我觉得还是那句话，什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier? 就是那种你去掉就完全不行，放别处也不行，只有插在那里才可以，所以什么which的touch-rule就不得不”通融“一下啦

另外饭饭，这题当时和suri等同学讨论过，你可以搜索一下

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 09:27
"mission-critical" modifier

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 09:38
标题: 谢谢yiayia~

关于which的跳跃修饰，我的总结是which想要跳跃修饰，
a)被修饰名词后面跟的成分必须是与之非常相关的。
b)而且跳跃修饰不能跳跃超过1个逗号，即which修饰的名词在which逗号前的句子里。

如：OG12 107题
正确句子：
Originally developed for detecting air pullutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission(called...严格限定了a technique),which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine,archaeology,and criminology.
错误句子：
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destorying it.(跳跃修饰超过2个逗号，OG就认为which修饰的是emission了)

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 9:16:57)

谢谢yiayia的总结~~对饭饭笔记补充帮助很大的说~~
187.United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.

A.that included

B.which includes

C.including

D.some of which were

E.among them being

正确选项：C~~
饭饭选对了~~但是对D的错误的解释不太懂哎~
C．Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts补丁：（应该就是跳过介词短语修饰中心词吧）。

D．some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。

不过~~yiayia你看~~~这个题里面就有一个“，”，所以说对于which跳跃限制这一点应该是无法应用的啊~~~？

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 09:44

yiayia说得没错，我觉得还是那句话，什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier? 就是那种你去掉就完全不行，放别处也不行，只有插在那里才可以，所以什么which的touch-rule就不得不”通融“一下啦

另外饭饭，这题当时和suri等同学讨论过，你可以搜索一下

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 9:23:40)

饭饭不太理解“mission-critical modifier”, 是否能大体转换解释成为限制性修饰呢~baby姐姐？
这里including**是介词短语结构~~那么是否可以说介词短语结构就是做限制性修饰呢？还是介词短语做限制性修饰和非限制性修饰是有判断根据的？还是说虽然这里including是介词短语，但是做语法分析的时候，看做分词呢？

分词作后置定语可分为限制性（紧跟在所修饰的中心词之后）和非限制性（用逗号与其所修饰的中心词分开）两种，其作用分别相当于一个限制性定语从句和非限制性定语从句。例如：
　　The funds raised (= which have been raised) are mainly used for helping the homeless.
　　筹集的资金主要用来帮助那些无家可归的人。
　　There are many students waiting (= who are waiting) to get examined.
　　有许多学生在等待检查。
This book, written (= which is written) in simple English, is suitable for beginners.
　　本书是用浅显的英语写的，适合初学者。

若是看做分词的话又是怎样判断是限制性修饰还是非限制性修饰呢？？？

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 09:47
不能超过1个，就是包括1个或者没有

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 09:50

不能超过1个，就是包括1个或者没有

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 9:47:43)

亲耐滴yiayia宝贝~~抱抱~~谢谢~~可是which引导非限制性定语从句前面基本上就素有“逗号”滴哇~~亲~~~
不能酱紫就拍掉which选项啊~~~

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 10:08
非限定中的逗号的确存在，
A technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can 正确
但如果再加入一个修饰成分，用逗号隔开，就存在a technique离which太远的问题了：A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can 错误

当然，如果逗号隔开的是不是并列的修饰成分（developed,called）,而是插入语 These techniques,such as A and B, which can 就正确了。

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 10:24

非限定中的逗号的确存在，
A technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can 正确
但如果再加入一个修饰成分，用逗号隔开，就存在a technique离which太远的问题了：A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can 错误

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 10:08:37)

嗯~~嗯~~~这点饭饭有所感悟了~~yiayia这里和justabeginningGG有异曲同工之妙~~谢谢yiayia！

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 10:26
饭饭mm，你注意which和that用法的区别，在你后面几个句子里，括号里的which都该用that.....参见我日记里教授给我改的作文

什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier，this is a MEANING issue.
一个是modify
一个是define
注意这两个动词的区别
比如我说： "a ratio"，鬼知道"a ratio"是个什么咚咚，你必须要给出definition: "a ratio of ______"
那么这个"of ____"就叫做"mission-critical modifier"
所谓的跳跃修饰的一种情况，是说跳跃这样的"mission-critical modifier"
比如一个句子里面 "a ratio of ____ that is Y....."
后面的"that is Y"就是跳跃修饰这个ratio，确切说修饰"a ratio of ___"

看看Manhattan给的例子，体会一下什么叫做"mission-critical modifier"
Right: He had a way OF DODGING OPPONENTS that impressed the scouts.
An ice sheet covers 80 percent OF THE SURFACE OF GREENLAND. an area roughly the size of Alaska.
因为单独的"a way" "80 percent"虾米都不是，所以必须有"mission-critical modifier"来define

这里", including ..."就按"comma+v-ing"理解就可以

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 9:23:40)

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/15 9:44:12)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 10:26

非限定中的逗号的确存在，
当然，如果逗号隔开的是不是并列的修饰成分（developed,called）,而是插入语 These techniques,such as A and B, which can 就正确了。

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 10:08:37)

有个问题yiayia如果有时间的话继续讨论呀~~~记得看过其他贴纸~~这种插入语“such as**”可以删除的, 酱紫的句子~~这里如果不是非限制性定从~而改成限制性定语从句，which是可以换成that的~~记得是baby姐姐在manhattan上看到Ron的例子吧~~

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 10:34
这道题，本来从意思上看，应该修饰posts。
但是posts和"comma+some of which"之间隔了 "within the Democratic Party during his first term"
分析一下，"within the Democratic Party during his first term"是不是"mission-critical" modifier?
不是！因为你去掉这一片，并不影响我们理解"posts"。换句话说，这一长串并非对名词"posts"作出definition.

所以说，这题必须遵从touch-rule，不能法外开恩。不管是"comma+which"，还是"comma+some of which"，都是严格遵从touch-rule.

187.United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.

A.that included

B.which includes

C.including

D.some of which were

E.among them being

正确选项：C~~
饭饭选对了~~但是对D的错误的解释不太懂哎~
C．Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts补丁：（应该就是跳过介词短语修饰中心词吧）。

D．some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。

注：黄色部分是饭饭自己加的布丁。。请问大家：如果C中的including可以跳跃了，那么D中的为什么不可以跳跃。

附：饭饭当初是从简洁角度排除D的。
谢谢大家！

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/14 22:22:21)

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 10:42
such as 那个句子的确把which改成that更好。

baby姐，这里", including ..."就按"comma+v-ing"理解不是分词结尾都是verb modifier? 难道后来结论有变化？求指教。

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 10:43

饭饭mm，你注意which和that用法的区别，在你后面几个句子里，括号里的which都该用that.....参见我日记里教授给我改的作文

什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier，this is a MEANING issue.
一个是modify
一个是define
注意这两个动词的区别
比如我说： "a ratio"，鬼知道"a ratio"是个什么咚咚，你必须要给出definition: "a ratio of ______"
那么这个"of ____"就叫做"mission-critical modifier"
所谓的跳跃修饰的一种情况，是说跳跃这样的"mission-critical modifier"
比如一个句子里面 "a ratio of ____ that is Y....."
后面的"that is Y"就是跳跃修饰这个ratio，确切说修饰"a ratio of ___"

看看Manhattan给的例子，体会一下什么叫做"mission-critical modifier"
Right: He had a way OF DODGING OPPONENTS that impressed the scouts.
An ice sheet covers 80 percent OF THE SURFACE OF GREENLAND. an area roughly the size of Alaska.
因为单独的"a way" "80 percent"虾米都不是，所以必须有"mission-critical modifier"来define

这里", including ..."就按"comma+v-ing"理解就可以

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 9:23:40)

~~饭饭对“mission-critical modifier” 感觉上有一定的理解了~~需要做题来检验~~谢谢baby姐姐！
话说baby姐姐的日记就是百宝囊~~饭饭每天都去偷偷取宝藏

~~羞赧了。。。。

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 10:43
yiayia这句话，我们把"such as A and B"去掉
These techniques, which can ..., _______.
这样的句子是可以的。
这句话，"which can ..." is a non-essential modifier
因为你说的是"These techniques"，换句话说，我们读者已经知道你指的具体是什么techniques了，所以你再说"which can ..."并不是在帮助我们确认你指的哪个techniques，而是给出补充信息，这就叫做non-essential.
而假如这个句子：
A technique, which can alleviate pain, is under development.
这句话从意思上看，很不好，因为读者不知道你的"a technique"指的是什么technique，你那个"which can alleviate pain"用的是non-essential modifier结构，不能理解为对"a technique"给出difinition，所以读者仍然不知道你指的什么。这句话就该改成：
A technique that can alleviate pain is under development.

其实我一直觉得，我们该从意思上去理解essential modifier vs. non-essential modifier
就像饭饭看到那个Ron举的那个例子一样（好象是a man that we saw yesterday那个例子）

非限定中的逗号的确存在，
当然，如果逗号隔开的是不是并列的修饰成分（developed,called）,而是插入语 These techniques,such as A and B, which can 就正确了。

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 10:08:37)

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/15 10:26:57)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 10:47

这道题，本来从意思上看，应该修饰posts。
但是posts和"comma+some of which"之间隔了 "within the Democratic Party during his first term"
分析一下，"within the Democratic Party during his first term"是不是"mission-critical" modifier?
不是！因为你去掉这一片，并不影响我们理解"posts"。换句话说，这一长串并非对名词"posts"作出definition.

所以说，这题必须遵从touch-rule，不能法外开恩。不管是"comma+which"，还是"comma+some of which"，都是严格遵从touch-rule.

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 10:34:05)

赞哪baby姐姐的分析过程~饭饭对mission-critical modifier又进一步的理解了~~
touch-rule原则饭饭记住了！！

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 10:50

yiayia这句话，我们把"such as A and B"去掉
These techniques, which can ..., _______.
这样的句子是可以的。
这句话，"which can ..." is a non-essential modifier
因为你说的是"These techniques"，换句话说，我们读者已经知道你指的具体是什么techniques了，所以你再说"which can ..."并不是在帮助我们确认你指的哪个techniques，而是给出补充信息，这就叫做non-essential.
而假如这个句子：
A technique, which can alleviate pain, is under development.
这句话从意思上看，很不好，因为读者不知道你的"a technique"指的是什么technique，你那个"which can alleviate pain"用的是non-essential modifier结构，不能理解为对"a technique"给出difinition，所以读者仍然不知道你指的什么。这句话就该改成：
A technique that can alleviate pain is under development.

其实我一直觉得，我们该从意思上去理解essential modifier vs. non-essential modifier
就像饭饭看到那个Ron举的那个例子一样（好象是a man that we saw yesterday那个例子）

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 10:43:58)

嗯！

~~饭饭要学会从逻辑含义层面对语法进一步的掌控学习~~！

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 10:51
哈，我刚和你同时发贴了，你也发现那个which的问题了

你说得没错啊，"comma+v-ing"都是verb modifier，这里也可以按verb modifier去理解：
DI was appointed to several posts, including A and B.
根据"include"这个词的意思，你可以理解为posts包括A and B.
也可以理解为"including A and B"对整个这句话"DI was appointed to several posts"作状语，补充说明
都可以的。其实"including"更像是习惯用法。

such as 那个句子的确把which改成that更好。

baby姐，这里", including ..."就按"comma+v-ing"理解不是分词结尾都是verb modifier? 难道后来结论有变化？求指教。

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 10:42:01)

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 10:54
呀，刚注意这里有这么好的现成的例句。
a technique called proton-included X-ray emission(called...严格限定了a technique)
yiayia说得很对！

关于which的跳跃修饰，我的总结是which想要跳跃修饰，
a)被修饰名词后面跟的成分必须是与之非常相关的。
b)而且跳跃修饰不能跳跃超过1个逗号，即which修饰的名词在which逗号前的句子里。

如：OG12 107题
正确句子：
Originally developed for detecting air pullutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission(called...严格限定了a technique),which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine,archaeology,and criminology.
错误句子：
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destorying it.(跳跃修饰超过1个逗号，OG就认为which修饰的是emission了)

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 9:16:57)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 11:00

哈，我刚和你同时发贴了，你也发现那个which的问题了

such as 那个句子的确把which改成that更好。

baby姐，这里", including ..."就按"comma+v-ing"理解不是分词结尾都是verb modifier? 难道后来结论有变化？求指教。

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 10:42:01)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/2/15 10:51:29)

按照verb-modifier理解的话，在本句中只能作为主句状语修饰理解；不能作为谓语动词伴随，这样逻辑不通顺，这里就要根据including的本身含义进行逻辑分析了吧？

作者: Royzhang0929 时间: 2012-2-15 11:06
对于饭饭的这个总结：（1）在非限制性定语修饰名词，被修饰名词和修饰词之间有介词短语酱紫滴结构间隔的时候，V-ing结构做非限制性定语修饰的“跳跃能力”要强于which引导的非限制性定语从句，就是说这个时候V-ing结构的非限制性定语更具有效性。
我不太同意：

v-ing的用法方面：（我忘了当时为什么要搞清楚了，因为啥题不记得了）
以下引自baby姐与某人牛牛讨论的结果：
1) V+ing, SVO 可以修饰主语、谓语 noun modifier or verb modifier

v-ing放到句子之前，不用太关心verb modifier，还是叫noun modifier，都无所谓，因为他就是针对主语的且和主句意思有关

Using the lastest technology, the engineeridentified the problem. （verb modifier）

Using accounts of various ancient writers，scholars have painted a sketchy picture of the activities of anall-female cult that, perhaps as early as the sixth century B.C., worshipped agoddess known in Latin as Bona Dea, “the good goddess.” （noun modifier）

2)S,V+ing,VO 修饰主语 noun modifier

Neuroscientists, V-ing, verb + object.

3)SVO,V-ing[R1] 修饰谓语，句子 verb modifier or clause modifier（相当于副词adverbial modifier, modifies the entire action of the precedingclause and applies to the subject within that clause.）
例子
OG12-1 The Glass House Mountains in Queensland, Australia,were sighted in 1770 by the English navigator Captain James Cook, by whom they were named supposedly because its sheer wet rocks glistened like glass.

其中的C: naming them supposedly since their
OG解释错误原因是as the the object of a preposition and not the subject of the clause, James Cook does not work as the noun that verbal phrase beginning with naming can describe

I lifted the weight, whistling。（仅仅表示同时发生的一个动作）

OG11-24 /12-30For members of theseventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with woodenframes were essential items of military equipment, a method to protectwarriors against enemy arrows and spears.

A. a method to protect

B. as a method protecting

C. Protecting（C）

D. as a protection of

E. to protect

有童鞋(我也是。。)可能认为protecting 是修饰items或equipment, 但是"svo comma v-ing"必须是verb modifier！OG对此的解释是 revealing the purpose of the items.体会下为什么不说modify the items of military equipment? 因此protecting是 adv,表目的。

修饰句子往往表示由被修饰句子引起的结果，这种情况，ing结尾不存在问题

Crime has recently decreased,leading to...

TIPS:nounmodifier 必须满足touch rule
Verbmodifer位置比较宽松，放在句首、句尾都可，但一定要applies to thesubject
open to discuss

-- by 会员 justabeginning (2012/2/15 1:32:42)

~~~~~~>0<~~~~~~路飞阁阁最好了.....谢谢路飞~

！.....这个贴纸不知道肿么了........昨天就是没人理啊.

~~~

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/15 7:41:02)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 11:09
标题: 谢谢yiayia，下面的句子饭饭要再好好体会背下来啊~

关于which的跳跃修饰，我的总结是which想要跳跃修饰，
a)被修饰名词后面跟的成分必须是与之非常相关的。
b)而且跳跃修饰不能跳跃超过1个逗号，即which修饰的名词在which逗号前的句子里。

如：OG12 107题
正确句子：
Originally developed for detecting air pullutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission(called...严格限定了a technique),which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine,archaeology,and criminology.
错误句子：
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destorying it.(跳跃修饰超过1个逗号，OG就认为which修饰的是emission了)

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 9:16:57)

作者: yiayia 时间: 2012-2-15 11:18

我不是牛牛

baby姐，嗯~自己都忘了用了these特指了
including看自己理解吧，我认为它就是放在句尾，修饰句中的某个名词。
朗文认为它是个介词。
in·clud·ing
prep
used to introduce something or someone that is part of a larger group or amount you have just mentioned
　The price is £25.50, including postage and packing.修饰主语
　You'll need a variety of skills, including leadership and negotiating.修饰宾语

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 11:24

对于饭饭的这个总结：（1）在非限制性定语修饰名词，被修饰名词和修饰词之间有介词短语酱紫滴结构间隔的时候，V-ing结构做非限制性定语修饰的“跳跃能力”要强于which引导的非限制性定语从句，就是说这个时候V-ing结构的非限制性定语更具有效性。
我不太同意：
3)SVO,V-ing[R1]修饰谓语，句子 verb modifier or clause modifier（相当于副词adverbial modifier, modifies the entire action of the precedingclause and applies to the subject within that clause.）
例子
OG12-1 The Glass House Mountains in Queensland, Australia,were sighted in 1770 by the English navigator Captain James Cook, by whom they were named supposedly because its sheer wet rocks glistened like glass.

其中的C: naming them supposedly since their
OG解释错误原因是as the the object of a preposition and not the subject of the clause, James Cook does not work as the noun that verbal phrase beginning with naming can describe

I lifted the weight, whistling。（仅仅表示同时发生的一个动作）

OG11-24 /12-30For members of theseventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with woodenframes were essential items of military equipment, a method to protectwarriors against enemy arrows and spears.

A. a method to protect

B. as a method protecting

C. Protecting（C）

D. as a protection of

E. to protect

有童鞋(我也是。。)可能认为protecting 是修饰items或equipment, 但是"svo comma v-ing"必须是verb modifier！OG对此的解释是 revealing the purpose of the items.体会下为什么不说modify the items of military equipment? 因此protecting是 adv,表目的。

修饰句子往往表示由被修饰句子引起的结果，这种情况，ing结尾不存在问题

Crime has recently decreased,leading to...

TIPS:nounmodifier 必须满足touch rule
Verbmodifer位置比较宽松，放在句首、句尾都可，但一定要applies to thesubject
open to discuss

-- by 会员 Royzhang0929 (2012/2/15 11:06:40)

Roy亲~先谢谢roy的tips的补充及讨论拓展~~
但是饭饭木有明白亲不同意在那里。。。这个。。。including饭饭一直是遵照prep语法笔记讲述视为介词短语，此处拿来和some of which比较也是出于修饰的名词~~
但是看亲的驳斥立足是基于V-ing结构做状语修饰谓语动词和主句~~饭饭这里刚刚经baby姐姐指教拓展思维从状语角度考虑~~还在思忖学习Ing~~
之前结论是基于介词短语修饰名词考虑~~不知道亲是否是和饭饭基于一点出发进行驳斥？

还有那个protecting的题。。。。饭饭之前会的。。。。就是看了OG解释为目的昨天就又纠结了to protect为什么不行，既然都是表目的，句子还是主系表结构，主语和表语属性一致。这样to protect在这种情况下，相对于protecting，不是更少滴造成歧义么。。。。看了看bat滴神贴。。。感悟了一点。。。。现在在继续想。。。sigh
补充一点啊：这个to protect饭饭后来是从动作发出者不符合逻辑来排除的~~~正在思维确认ing~~一个自我说服的过程！

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 11:26

我不是牛牛

baby姐，嗯~自己都忘了用了these特指了

including看自己理解吧，我认为它就是放在句尾，修饰句中的某个名词。
朗文认为它是个介词。
in·clud·ing
prep
used to introduce something or someone that is part of a larger group or amount you have just mentioned
　The price is £25.50, including postage and packing.修饰主语
　You'll need a variety of skills, including leadership and negotiating.修饰宾语

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 11:18:31)

啊~~谢谢yiayia~~饭饭一定要学会安装这个朗文帅锅！~~~那就是要再回归到按介词短语来理解？？

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-15 15:09
good find! thx!!
之前我查词典都没查到including有prep这个词性呢，这下确认啦

我不是牛牛

-- by 会员 yiayia (2012/2/15 11:18:31)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-15 21:56
标题: 应该可以作为这个问题的最终出路吧~~可以下个小结论了吧~~including在这里是介词结构~

-- by 会员 justabeginning (2012/2/15 1:32:42)

~~~~~~>0<~~~~~~路飞阁阁最好了.....谢谢路飞~

！.....这个贴纸不知道肿么了........昨天就是没人理啊.

~~~

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/15 7:41:02)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-16 01:00
标题: ~~这里饭饭之前纠结的一个小问题~~引用一下aeo斑斑滴观点~~希望对广大观众有所启迪~~
aeo：
1)我对定语、状语的理解是这样的：有的时候同一个成分、结构可以做定语，也可以做状语，只要区分被修饰对象与结合时态等分析逻辑上能不能合理修饰就够了，没必要太在意是做定语还是做状语。也就是说，区不区分定语、状语都可以，关键是要明白定语和状语的功能都是“修饰”(有点像废话，不过我的意思是平时我统一把他们记为“修饰语”，只有在做题目解释的时候才区分一下)。

prep1-188中，A选项"having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood"，你可以把这个成分理解成状语，也可以理解为定语，修饰的都是Neuroscientists这个主体或这个主体发出的动作，只要你把having看做定语和状语时，句意理解起来是一样的，那么就没有歧义问题。

而prep1-97：Industrialization and modern methods of insect control have improved the standard of living around the globe while at the same time they have introduced some 100,000 dangerous chemical pollutants, having gone virtually unregulated since they were developed more than 50 years ago.这里面having可能修饰pollutants，也可能修饰they have introduced some 100,000 dangerous chemical pollutants整个分句，所以having产生了修饰歧义

摘自prep08语法笔记~饭饭呢知道大家都有~~但是看完介个贴纸再看这段话滴体悟应该是不同的~

作者: 半阙 时间: 2012-2-16 01:30
给饭饭贴一道类似的题哦~

25. GWD31-Q25

Most European countries offer a variety of programsfor assisting working parents, which include paid maternity and paternity leaves, financial allowances for families with children, and they subsidize public nurseries and kindergartens.

A.for assisting working parents, which include paid maternity and paternity leaves, financial allowances for families with children, and they subsidize

B.for the assistance of working parents, to include paid maternity and paternity leaves, also financial allowances for families with children, and subsidizing

C.in order to assist working parents, to include paid maternity and paternity leaves, financial allowances for families with children, and to subsidize

D.to assist working parents, which includes paid maternity and paternity leaves, financial allowances for families with children, and they also subsidize

E.to assist working parents, including paid maternity and paternity leaves, financial allowances for families with children, and subsidized

这个选E
一样的知识点哈~~

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-2-16 07:57
我严重同意斑斑说的，争论句首的"v-ing+comma" modifier到底是noun modifier还是adverbial modifier没有意义，只要逻辑上applies to the subject就行，殊途同归。

aeo：
1)我对定语、状语的理解是这样的：有的时候同一个成分、结构可以做定语，也可以做状语，只要区分被修饰对象与结合时态等分析逻辑上能不能合理修饰就够了，没必要太在意是做定语还是做状语。也就是说，区不区分定语、状语都可以，关键是要明白定语和状语的功能都是“修饰”(有点像废话，不过我的意思是平时我统一把他们记为“修饰语”，只有在做题目解释的时候才区分一下)。

prep1-188中，A选项"having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood"，你可以把这个成分理解成状语，也可以理解为定语，修饰的都是Neuroscientists这个主体或这个主体发出的动作，只要你把having看做定语和状语时，句意理解起来是一样的，那么就没有歧义问题。

而prep1-97：Industrialization and modern methods of insect control have improved the standard of living around the globe while at the same time they have introduced some 100,000 dangerous chemical pollutants, having gone virtually unregulated since they were developed more than 50 years ago.这里面having可能修饰pollutants，也可能修饰they have introduced some 100,000 dangerous chemical pollutants整个分句，所以having产生了修饰歧义

摘自prep08语法笔记~饭饭呢知道大家都有~~但是看完介个贴纸再看这段话滴体悟应该是不同的~

-- by 会员泾渭不凡 (2012/2/16 1:00:50)

作者: 泾渭不凡 时间: 2012-2-16 17:43
to 半阙：好温暖滴姑娘啊~~谢谢例子补充~~
to babybearmm: 呵呵~~谢谢baby姐姐一直很帮帮饭饭啊，学到好多哦~~真感激哦~~

作者: 宝爱一 时间: 2012-5-15 21:15
很N的帖子，不能沉了嘎~~吼吼~~丁丁~~

作者: wellsli 时间: 2012-9-2 21:35
神贴...好和谐的讨论那这个including引导的介词短语，能够修饰的范围到底有多大呢？

作者: lyc50336 时间: 2015-11-3 15:12
Mark!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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