ChaseDream

标题: 关于Prep07版上答案的一些疑问。help~~~!!!!! [打印本页]

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-12 16:44
标题: 关于Prep07版上答案的一些疑问。help~~~!!!!!
Q32: PP61.
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.
A. imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend
B. imposing stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending
C. that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend
D. that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending
E. that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending
(D) 正确，that引导定语从句修饰紧临的名词plans，说明plans的内容，impose and require是定语从句的并列谓语，现在分词spending作see的伴随状语。

为什么spending作see的伴随状语，而不是require的伴随状语？我觉得从语法上看，应该是做require的伴随状语的，那么逻辑就说不通了

作者: scarlett006 时间: 2012-5-12 17:35
我觉得spending是做前面整句话的伴随吧表结果？
求NN指正

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-12 17:51

我觉得spending是做前面整句话的伴随吧表结果？
求NN指正

-- by 会员 scarlett006 (2012/5/12 17:35:33)

不对，这样，逻辑主语就错误了。因为我感觉spending less time with each.肯定是要有逻辑主语的，是谁spend less time??

作者: 秋晨小仔 时间: 2012-5-12 18:04
spending是个结果状语，我不觉得8它是和主句平行的。但是这句话的意思我很明确。从逻辑意思上来看，因为see more patients,导致医生在每个病人身上花的时间就少了。所以如果一定要说逻辑主语的话，是doctors...可是我没有理论依据。。

作者: 秋晨小仔 时间: 2012-5-12 18:07
我觉得spending是包含在plan that后面那一坨里的，然后紧紧挨着to see，并且修饰它

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-12 18:10

我觉得spending是包含在plan that后面那一坨里的，然后紧紧挨着to see，并且修饰它

-- by 会员秋晨小仔 (2012/5/12 18:07:37)

逻辑上的确是的，但为什么做状语只修饰前面一个句子的一部分？按道理应该是修饰前面整个句子的。

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-5-12 18:48
咱从头说，什么叫做adverbial modifier?
是修饰clause/sentence的，而决定clause/sentence的标志，就是verb.
btw.所以英语里叫做 adverb: ad - verb

通常我们说comma + v-ing是adverbial modifier, 修饰previous clause的

这里，仍然是adverbial modifier，修饰的是"doctors to see more patients"
that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending ...
你可以认为这里：
subject = doctors
verb = to see (more patients)
所以"doctors to see more patients"主谓齐全，可以相当于一个clause.
或者你也可以按我上面的理解，一个clause的核心是verb，这里"spending ..."就是修饰前面的verb "see"

我承认以上的解释是事后诸葛，这道题的take-home是，v-ing是可以修饰类似clause的咚咚的。
这里require doctors to see more patients
类似于require that doctors see more patients
这两个highlight部分是等效的，只是说第一个是idiomatic usage而已

但这题，就算是我不知道以上，也能得到D选项。
先排除A/B. 因为imposing相当于"that are imposing"，时态不对。
然后剩下的，C和E的平行存在严重逻辑错误。就得到D了，D的逻辑说得通

Q32: PP61.
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.
A. imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend
B. imposing stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending
C. that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend
D. that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending
E. that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending
(D) 正确，that引导定语从句修饰紧临的名词plans，说明plans的内容，impose and require是定语从句的并列谓语，现在分词spending作see的伴随状语。

为什么spending作see的伴随状语，而不是require的伴随状语？我觉得从语法上看，应该是做require的伴随状语的，那么逻辑就说不通了

-- by 会员单调唱 (2012/5/12 16:44:41)

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-12 19:29
baby姐基本功扎实呀~~刚吃完饭回来，缓缓再仔细想想~

咱从头说，什么叫做adverbial modifier?
是修饰clause/sentence的，而决定clause/sentence的标志，就是verb.
btw.所以英语里叫做 adverb: ad - verb

通常我们说comma + v-ing是adverbial modifier, 修饰previous clause的

这里，仍然是adverbial modifier，修饰的是"doctors to see more patients"
that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending ...
你可以认为这里：
subject = doctors
verb = to see (more patients)
所以"doctors to see more patients"主谓齐全，可以相当于一个clause.
或者你也可以按我上面的理解，一个clause的核心是verb，这里"spending ..."就是修饰前面的verb "see"

我承认以上的解释是事后诸葛，这道题的take-home是，v-ing是可以修饰类似clause的咚咚的。
这里require doctors to see more patients
类似于require that doctors see more patients
这两个highlight部分是等效的，只是说第一个是idiomatic usage而已

但这题，就算是我不知道以上，也能得到D选项。
先排除A/B. 因为imposing相当于"that are imposing"，时态不对。
然后剩下的，C和E的平行存在严重逻辑错误。就得到D了，D的逻辑说得通

-- by 会员单调唱 (2012/5/12 16:44:41)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/5/12 18:48:07)

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-13 22:06
标题: 呼叫Baby姐~~！
先排除A/B. 因为imposing相当于"that are imposing"，时态不对。baby姐，你这个什么意思？
A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted pedestrians right-of-way.这个句子是正确的，那么这个句子里regulating能相当于that are regulating么？现在分词作后置定语，可以表示一个法规或计划的内容啊，那plans imposing 为什么有问题呢？？

-- by 会员单调唱 (2012/5/12 16:44:41)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/5/12 18:48:07)

作者: lm5054 时间: 2012-5-14 01:19
看大神的帖子就是受益良多！！

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-5-14 10:54

先排除A/B. 因为imposing相当于"that are imposing"，时态不对。baby姐，你这个什么意思？
A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted pedestrians right-of-way.这个句子是正确的，那么这个句子里regulating能相当于that are regulating么？现在分词作后置定语，可以表示一个法规或计划的内容啊，那plans imposing 为什么有问题呢？？

-- by 会员单调唱 (2012/5/12 16:44:41)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/5/12 18:48:07)

-- by 会员单调唱 (2012/5/13 22:06:14)

作者: babybearmm 时间: 2012-5-14 10:57
见以上附件及其中所有链接

A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted pedestrians right-of-way.

你给的这个句子之所以正确，是逻辑关系。
regulating这个动作是background
你理解这句话的逻辑意思就明白了：这个NYC ordinance是干吗的（regulating the use of bicycles），这其中包括mandated ....

上个附件中的某个link里Ron举了OG12的那个例子("moving rapidly")，就说v-ing作为background.

我造个句子吧
The GMAT exam primarily measuring logical reasoning skills includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR.
这个句子和你给的例句很像
Here the use of v-ing ("measuring logical reasoning skills") as noun modifier is appropriate because:
"measuring logical reasoning skills" sets the background for our discussion of GMAT components ("includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR").
Alternatively, you can think this way: "measuring logical reasoning skills" is logically connected with "includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR". i.e. Given the objective of GMAT ("measuring logical reasoning skills"), it tests these sessions.

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-14 15:07

baby姐厉害~~看了一中午你的讨论帖~获益匪浅~！！！！-ing结构的确是个难点。光看没用，后面还得我自己在做题过程中不断加深自己的理解~然后锻炼出来语意，逻辑的feeling~~
谢谢baby姐~！！！

作者: 单调唱 时间: 2012-5-14 15:15
regulating这个动作是background，我们为什么要从background的角度来看？不是很能理解这样理解的Point~如果从这个角度，用that从句又有什么问题？

that从句和现在分词修饰，区别是一个表一次性，短暂的；而另一个是延续性的，多次的。应该是这上面的差异。为什么ordinance用现在分词而不用that从句，只是因为条例是延续，多次性的。而Plans只是短暂的，一次性的。我不太能区分Plans到底是表短暂的，还是延续性的。baby姐能指点迷津么~

见以上附件及其中所有链接

A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted pedestrians right-of-way.

你给的这个句子之所以正确，是逻辑关系。
regulating这个动作是background
你理解这句话的逻辑意思就明白了：这个NYC ordinance是干吗的（regulating the use of bicycles），这其中包括mandated ....

上个附件中的某个link里Ron举了OG12的那个例子("moving rapidly")，就说v-ing作为background.

我造个句子吧
The GMAT exam primarily measuring logical reasoning skills includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR.
这个句子和你给的例句很像
Here the use of v-ing ("measuring logical reasoning skills") as noun modifier is appropriate because:
"measuring logical reasoning skills" sets the background for our discussion of GMAT components ("includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR").
Alternatively, you can think this way: "measuring logical reasoning skills" is logically connected with "includes quantitative, verbal, AWA, and IR". i.e. Given the objective of GMAT ("measuring logical reasoning skills"), it tests these sessions.

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/5/14 10:57:47)

作者: sphinxzhang 时间: 2012-5-14 15:34
MARK..同问短暂行性以及background的角度

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