ChaseDream

标题: 关于whereas的一点疑问 [打印本页]
作者: lzh0128    时间: 2012-2-22 21:51
标题: 关于whereas的一点疑问
prep07语法笔记中：
Unlike using spices for cooking, in medicinal usage they are taken in large quantities in order to treat particular maladies
(A) Unlike using spices for cooking, in medicinal usage they are taken
(B) Unlike spices that are used in cooking, in using spices for medicine, they are taken
(C) Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done
(D) In cooking, small quantities of spices are used, whereas in medicinal usage spices are taken
(E) In cooking, the usage of spices is in small quantities, whereas in medicinal usage they are taken
考点:比较（Comparison）

1)标准书面语中,like后只加名词表比较



(A) unlike后面应该接名词

(B) in using短语既可以修饰前一个分句,又可以修饰后一个分句,造成修饰歧意.

(C) unlike后面应该接名词

(D)正确,用whereas表示对比关系前后句子在形式上不需要完全对等,修饰成分紧靠修饰对象,避免

了修饰歧意

(E) the usage of spices is in small quantities表达笨拙;they指代不清,可能指代quantities或者spices.

OG SC 136
Whereas in mammals the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in parallel lines, in birds the tubes form a random pattern.
(A) Whereas in mammals the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in parallel lines, in birds the tubes
(B) Whereas the tiny tubes for the conveying of nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in mammals in parallel lines, birds have tubes that
(C) Unlike mammals, where the tiny tubes for conveying nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in parallel lines, birds’ tubes
(D) Unlike mammals, in whom the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in parallel lines, the tubes in birds
(E) Unlike the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells, which in mammals are arrayed in parallel lines, in birds the tubes

Whereas introduces two contrasting situations or events and should be followed by parallel structures. In this sentence, whereas is immediately followed by a clause beginning with the prepositional phrase in mammals; this means that the second part of the sentence must also be a clause that opens with a preposition that
functions in the same way—in this case, in birds. Th is structure clarifi es that the things being contrasted are the tubes in mammals and the tubes in birds. Incorrect versions of the sentence grammatically contrast tubes and birds, mammals and tubes, or birds and mammals.
A Correct. Parallel structures make clear that the tubes in mammals are being contrasted with the tubes in birds.
B The faulty parallelism results in a sentence that is confusing and unnecessarily wordy.
C Th e sentence compares mammals and birds’tubes.
D Because of faulty parallelism, this sentence also compares mammals and tubes in birds.
E Th is structure is wordy and confusing because of faulty parallelism.

求大神解答：
whereas引导两个表示对比关系的句子在形式上要不要平行啊？！！
语法笔记那道题选B为什么不行啊？之前已经有了in cooking了，后面in medicinal usage怎么还会修饰前句呢？没歧义啊。。
作者: lzh0128    时间: 2012-2-23 17:23
自己顶！
作者: yiayia    时间: 2012-3-12 19:04
只是内容上的不对称，但结构上仍然要保持平行。
再举两道例子：
Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, whereas nuclear power accounts for just over 33 percent of the energy produced in Germany.
结构：主谓宾+介词短语
although也有这用法：
Although the lines of competition are clearly defined in industries that are more established, they are blurred and indistinct in the Internet industry, as competing companies one day may be partners the next.
但这不是一定成立的黄金rule，一切还要从句子意思有没有表达清楚---清晰，然后追求句子的优美。
作者: 99qiuqiu    时间: 2012-4-13 06:11
B：the conveying of 不简洁
作者: bob9603    时间: 2012-4-13 09:12
小菜有点想弱弱的问一下，第一道题中的C怎么错了？
lz的解释是：unlike后面应该接名词
作者: bob9603    时间: 2012-4-13 10:27
我想说一下我的错误想法，nn们麻烦帮忙指正一下~
我觉得c：Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done

我总感觉这个是名词成分的比较，前面的cooking 是名词，后面的taking spices也是名词成分我觉得~
我不太明白我哪里想错了~我知道unlike要严格对仗，且后面只能加名词，不能加句子~
所以我觉得cooking是名词，而with spices是修饰cooking的，我个人觉得，其实也可以算作cooking名词的一部分；而后面的taking spices 是后半觉得主语，显然，那它也就是名词成分，而for medicinal use是修饰taking spices的，小菜个人觉得也应该算是名词的一部分~

其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~
但这道题我确实是有点混乱，总感觉这是两个名词比较~
望nn来敲打敲打我~~~~~
作者: babybearmm    时间: 2012-4-13 11:13
你的分析都没错，你对unlike的理解很正确（名词vs名词的比较）。我觉得，不妨跳出来，从effective expression角度来审视。
(C) Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done in large quantities in order to treat particular maladies

我想请问，你读这句话之后，你知道如何"unlike"么？你知道"cooking with spices"是个什么情况么？
我以上用彩色highlight了两个部分，都是在描述"how it is done". 你能确定是怎么形成对比么？

咱来发散思维，假设哈
In cooking, spices are used in large quantities in order to be fancy and eye-catching.
In medical practice, spices are used in large quantities in order to treat the disease.
假如事实是这么一种情况，原句的"unlike"也makes sense，对不对？因为一个是纯粹华而不实，另一个是有功用，所以你可以说unlike.

但是，原文要表达的contrast如下：
in cooking ---- small quantities
in medial practice ---- large quantities
只有D和E点出了in cooking是个什么情况，即表达出了如何形成contrast。

"其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~"
你说的没错，我从网上随便找个句子哈：
Unlikemammals, birds have a unique group of peripheral receptors located inthelung called intrapulmonary chemoreceptors (IPC) that are acutelysensitiveto carbon dioxide and insensitive to hypoxia.
这句话简化一下：
Unlike mammals, birds have X.
那么人们很straightforward的逻辑推理，就是: mammals do not have X.
所以，这个句子的逻辑非常明确。

但是原句，咱就没法通过"unlike"来推出in cooking到底是个什么样的情况....

--
Stacey是这么分析C选项的，我个人觉得这个属于the subtlety of english language啦，咱一起学习下。不过个人觉得，Stacey这种思路non-native speakers很难学到. 你觉得像我以上那样逻辑分析咋样？
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/unlike-using-spices-for-cooking-in-medicinal-usage-t1062.html?sid=0fbea886ee03c5b6fef864f323904ba8

Not quite.  The comparison is cooking vs. taking: cooking spices vs. taking spices (for medicinal use).  That's okay.  The issue is that we can't say "taking spices is done in large quantities..."


我想说一下我的错误想法，nn们麻烦帮忙指正一下~
我觉得c：Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done

我总感觉这个是名词成分的比较，前面的cooking 是名词，后面的taking spices也是名词成分我觉得~
我不太明白我哪里想错了~我知道unlike要严格对仗，且后面只能加名词，不能加句子~
所以我觉得cooking是名词，而with spices是修饰cooking的，我个人觉得，其实也可以算作cooking名词的一部分；而后面的taking spices 是后半觉得主语，显然，那它也就是名词成分，而for medicinal use是修饰taking spices的，小菜个人觉得也应该算是名词的一部分~

其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~
但这道题我确实是有点混乱，总感觉这是两个名词比较~
望nn来敲打敲打我~~~~~
-- by 会员 bob9603 (2012/4/13 10:27:38)

作者: bob9603    时间: 2012-4-13 16:20
你的分析都没错，你对unlike的理解很正确（名词vs名词的比较）。我觉得，不妨跳出来，从effective expression角度来审视。
(C) Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is donein large quantitiesin order to treat particular maladies

我想请问，你读这句话之后，你知道如何"unlike"么？你知道"cooking with spices"是个什么情况么？
我以上用彩色highlight了两个部分，都是在描述"how it is done". 你能确定是怎么形成对比么？

咱来发散思维，假设哈
In cooking, spices are used in large quantitiesin order to be fancy and eye-catching.
In medical practice, spices are used in large quantitiesin order to treat the disease.
假如事实是这么一种情况，原句的"unlike"也makes sense，对不对？因为一个是纯粹华而不实，另一个是有功用，所以你可以说unlike.

但是，原文要表达的contrast如下：
in cooking ---- small quantities
in medial practice ---- large quantities
只有D和E点出了in cooking是个什么情况，即表达出了如何形成contrast。

"其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~"
你说的没错，我从网上随便找个句子哈：
Unlikemammals, birds have a unique group of peripheral receptors located inthelung called intrapulmonary chemoreceptors (IPC) that are acutelysensitiveto carbon dioxide and insensitive to hypoxia.
这句话简化一下：
Unlike mammals, birds have X.
那么人们很straightforward的逻辑推理，就是: mammals do not have X.
所以，这个句子的逻辑非常明确。

但是原句，咱就没法通过"unlike"来推出in cooking到底是个什么样的情况....

--
Stacey是这么分析C选项的，我个人觉得这个属于the subtlety of english language啦，咱一起学习下。不过个人觉得，Stacey这种思路non-native speakers很难学到. 你觉得像我以上那样逻辑分析咋样？
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/unlike-using-spices-for-cooking-in-medicinal-usage-t1062.html?sid=0fbea886ee03c5b6fef864f323904ba8

Not quite.  The comparison is cooking vs. taking: cooking spices vs. taking spices (for medicinal use).  That's okay.  The issue is that we can't say "taking spices is done in large quantities..."


我想说一下我的错误想法，nn们麻烦帮忙指正一下~
我觉得c：Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done

我总感觉这个是名词成分的比较，前面的cooking 是名词，后面的taking spices也是名词成分我觉得~
我不太明白我哪里想错了~我知道unlike要严格对仗，且后面只能加名词，不能加句子~
所以我觉得cooking是名词，而with spices是修饰cooking的，我个人觉得，其实也可以算作cooking名词的一部分；而后面的taking spices 是后半觉得主语，显然，那它也就是名词成分，而for medicinal use是修饰taking spices的，小菜个人觉得也应该算是名词的一部分~

其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~
但这道题我确实是有点混乱，总感觉这是两个名词比较~
望nn来敲打敲打我~~~~~
-- by 会员 bob9603 (2012/4/13 10:27:38)


-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/4/13 11:13:12)

先谢谢baby姐这么详细的解答啦，好开心~O(∩_∩)O哈哈~
我能明白baby姐的意思，但是我当读原句的时候，没有明显的，下意识的感觉到small & large的比较，更多的是像baby姐举得例子的感觉：
Unlike mammals, birds have a unique group of peripheral receptors located inthelung called intrapulmonary chemoreceptors (IPC) that are acutelysensitiveto carbon dioxide and insensitive to hypoxia.

如果说，我的理解是有点混乱的话，那么是不是因为：taking spices for medicinal use is done，的done的出现~
我的意思是，如果把这句话把in large quantities 这部分改成表语成分，像“mammal & bird”那句话的话，那么选C是不是就正确了，即：不像cooking，药用的需要很大量为了。。。。~这样是不是就能说cooking的时候不是很大量~
而这道题由于比较点是在未划线部分的状语部分，所以C的说法不妥，这是因为这是在比较“not done & done”呢，还是“not large & large”呢~ 所以有歧义~
所以说从语法上看，c的unlike的语法上讲，没错，但是逻辑意思上，却有歧义~
而D的说法的说法就很明确的将“small & large” 写了除了一目了然，不论是语法还是逻辑意思，都没得挑，所以是D~

baby姐，你看我说的对嘛？（ps：我写这些的时候，我反复改了好几次，开始的时候一直处于混乱状态，对于“small & large”似有似无的感觉~现在整理出来了这个思路，望baby姐再拍拍我哈~抱拳啦O(∩_∩)O哈哈~）
作者: babybearmm    时间: 2012-4-13 16:37
你的分析都没错，你对unlike的理解很正确（名词vs名词的比较）。我觉得，不妨跳出来，从effective expression角度来审视。
(C) Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is donein large quantitiesin order to treat particular maladies

我想请问，你读这句话之后，你知道如何"unlike"么？你知道"cooking with spices"是个什么情况么？
我以上用彩色highlight了两个部分，都是在描述"how it is done". 你能确定是怎么形成对比么？

咱来发散思维，假设哈
In cooking, spices are used in large quantitiesin order to be fancy and eye-catching.
In medical practice, spices are used in large quantitiesin order to treat the disease.
假如事实是这么一种情况，原句的"unlike"也makes sense，对不对？因为一个是纯粹华而不实，另一个是有功用，所以你可以说unlike.

但是，原文要表达的contrast如下：
in cooking ---- small quantities
in medial practice ---- large quantities
只有D和E点出了in cooking是个什么情况，即表达出了如何形成contrast。

"其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~"
你说的没错，我从网上随便找个句子哈：
Unlikemammals, birds have a unique group of peripheral receptors located inthelung called intrapulmonary chemoreceptors (IPC) that are acutelysensitiveto carbon dioxide and insensitive to hypoxia.
这句话简化一下：
Unlike mammals, birds have X.
那么人们很straightforward的逻辑推理，就是: mammals do not have X.
所以，这个句子的逻辑非常明确。

但是原句，咱就没法通过"unlike"来推出in cooking到底是个什么样的情况....

--
Stacey是这么分析C选项的，我个人觉得这个属于the subtlety of english language啦，咱一起学习下。不过个人觉得，Stacey这种思路non-native speakers很难学到. 你觉得像我以上那样逻辑分析咋样？
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/unlike-using-spices-for-cooking-in-medicinal-usage-t1062.html?sid=0fbea886ee03c5b6fef864f323904ba8

Not quite.  The comparison is cooking vs. taking: cooking spices vs. taking spices (for medicinal use).  That's okay.  The issue is that we can't say "taking spices is done in large quantities..."


我想说一下我的错误想法，nn们麻烦帮忙指正一下~
我觉得c：Unlike cooking with spices, taking spices for medicinal use is done

我总感觉这个是名词成分的比较，前面的cooking 是名词，后面的taking spices也是名词成分我觉得~
我不太明白我哪里想错了~我知道unlike要严格对仗，且后面只能加名词，不能加句子~
所以我觉得cooking是名词，而with spices是修饰cooking的，我个人觉得，其实也可以算作cooking名词的一部分；而后面的taking spices 是后半觉得主语，显然，那它也就是名词成分，而for medicinal use是修饰taking spices的，小菜个人觉得也应该算是名词的一部分~

其实我知道unlike应该像类似于：unlike mammal，bird......这样的用法是最对的~
但这道题我确实是有点混乱，总感觉这是两个名词比较~
望nn来敲打敲打我~~~~~
-- by 会员 bob9603 (2012/4/13 10:27:38)




-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/4/13 11:13:12)



先谢谢baby姐这么详细的解答啦，好开心~O(∩_∩)O哈哈~
我能明白baby姐的意思，但是我当读原句的时候，没有明显的，下意识的感觉到small & large的比较，更多的是像baby姐举得例子的感觉：
Unlike mammals, birds have a unique group of peripheral receptors located inthelung called intrapulmonary chemoreceptors (IPC) that are acutelysensitiveto carbon dioxide and insensitive to hypoxia.

如果说，我的理解是有点混乱的话，那么是不是因为：taking spices for medicinal use is done，的done的出现~
我的意思是，如果把这句话把in large quantities 这部分改成表语成分，像“mammal & bird”那句话的话，那么选C是不是就正确了，即：不像cooking，药用的需要很大量为了。。。。~这样是不是就能说cooking的时候不是很大量~
而这道题由于比较点是在未划线部分的状语部分，所以C的说法不妥，这是因为这是在比较“not done & done”呢，还是“not large & large”呢~ 所以有歧义~
所以说从语法上看，c的unlike的语法上讲，没错，但是逻辑意思上，却有歧义~
而D的说法的说法就很明确的将“small & large” 写了除了一目了然，不论是语法还是逻辑意思，都没得挑，所以是D~

baby姐，你看我说的对嘛？（ps：我写这些的时候，我反复改了好几次，开始的时候一直处于混乱状态，对于“small & large”似有似无的感觉~现在整理出来了这个思路，望baby姐再拍拍我哈~抱拳啦O(∩_∩)O哈哈~）
-- by 会员 bob9603 (2012/4/13 16:20:56)




“我的意思是，如果把这句话把in large quantities 这部分改成表语成分，像“mammal & bird”那句话的话，那么选C是不是就正确了，即：不像cooking，药用的需要很大量为了。。。。~这样是不是就能说cooking的时候不是很大量~”

I think so....Although I cannot come up with a complete sentence. Perhaps something like this:
Unlike X, Y are in large quantities.
Reading this sentence, we can safely infer that "X are NOT in large quantities".

我觉得你分析得很有道理啊~~~咱可以今后看到unlike的题目留意一下哈，看是不是有这样的pattern. 但至少，逻辑明确是肯定满足的。
作者: mslancaster    时间: 2012-4-13 16:54
这个帖子要mark一下
作者: bob9603    时间: 2012-4-14 08:31
to baby姐~

O(∩_∩)O哈哈~，谢谢baby姐的鼓励哈，我是第一次纠结unlike的题，一直觉得这是一个“对仗看就好”的语法点，今后一定要多留意一下~（ps：就像baby姐说的，还是要先看语义，这样我觉得就不会有我这样的问题了~我一定要严格执行~）
作者: babybearmm    时间: 2012-4-15 08:38
类似题目
http://www.beatthegmat.com/unlike-water-which-is-complimentary-t71413.html#323651
作者: 陌上m花开    时间: 2013-2-21 17:32
我也这里存有同楼主一样的疑问，听了你的解答感觉很有帮助~特留爪表示感谢！喵！O(∩_∩)O~



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