ChaseDream
标题: OG13-132,请BAT和BABY姐姐来指点下 [打印本页]
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-2 12:31
标题: OG13-132,请BAT和BABY姐姐来指点下
132.Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year—they are often green and striped, or have plenty of bumps and bruises—heirlooms are more flavorful and thus in increasing demand.
(A) Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year
(B) Although heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year, appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins
(C) Although they appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year
(D) Grown from seeds saved during the previous year, heirloom tomatoes appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins
(E) Heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year, although they appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins
(1)A和C中都提到了heirloom tomatoeshas no predicate,这个是什么意思?是说heirloom和heirloom tomatoes 不能同时做主语?
(2)关于D的问题。BAT在帖子里http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-735356-1-1.html,baby姐姐在帖子里http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-735522-1-1.html,我同意BAT,如果这是个RUN-ON,那么B做何解释?而D里OG的官方解释里是:Beginning the sentence with the explanatory clausegrown from seeds … gives it too much importance.
我认为可能就是需要强调的要放句首,不能把修饰放在句首,你们觉得呢?D的最大错误个人觉得是少了although,改变原意。
(3)B,C。C不正确,我同意,但是我觉得B答案不是最好,因为有种感觉修改原句的味道。求NN帮忙。
Beginning the sentence with the explanatory clausegrown from seeds … gives it too much importance.
我认为可能就是需要强调的要放句首,不能把修饰放在句首,你们觉得呢?D的最大错误个人觉得是少了although,改变原意。
(3)B,C。C不正确,我同意,但是我觉得B答案不是最好,因为有种感觉修改原句的味道。求NN帮忙。
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-2 12:31
CD抽了,最后一句是(2)里面的,字体没法好好调整,谢谢。。
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-2 13:31
自顶。。。
作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-2 20:01
when the original sentence is grammatically incorrect,you should not worry the change of meaning
especially this question has four grammatically incorrect choices
作者: lelechen1107 时间: 2012-9-2 21:06
我也纠结在问题1
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-2 21:45
when the original sentence is grammatically incorrect,you should not worry the change of meaning
especially this question has four grammatically incorrect choices
-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/2 20:01:51)
yep,it is sure that we can chose the right answer as soon as possible.however, i think it is very important to find out why it is wrong?
作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-2 22:01
when the original sentence is grammatically incorrect,you should not worry the change of meaning
especially this question has four grammatically incorrect choices
-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/2 20:01:51)
yep,it is sure that we can chose the right answer as soon as possible.however, i think it is very important to find out why it is wrong?
-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/9/2 21:45:06)
刚才没看到你问A选项的那个。。。sorry
现在稍微谈下自己的看法:
.Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year—they are often green and striped, or have plenty of bumps and bruises—heirlooms are more flavorful and thus in increasing demand.
Although引导的状语从句,heirloom tomatoes是主语,grown修饰tomatoes,然后分号是提供额外信息,注意分号后的hierlloms又是一个主语(分号是不能隔开句子的)
所以这就是OG说为什么heirloom tomatoes没有predicate,因为后面的heirlooms抢了
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-2 22:08
when the original sentence is grammatically incorrect,you should not worry the change of meaning
especially this question has four grammatically incorrect choices
-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/2 20:01:51)
yep,it is sure that we can chose the right answer as soon as possible.however, i think it is very important to find out why it is wrong?
-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/9/2 21:45:06)
刚才没看到你问A选项的那个。。。sorry
现在稍微谈下自己的看法:
.Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year—they are often green and striped, or have plenty of bumps and bruises—heirlooms are more flavorful and thus in increasing demand.
Although引导的状语从句,heirloom tomatoes是主语,grown修饰tomatoes,然后分号是提供额外信息,注意分号后的hierlloms又是一个主语(分号是不能隔开句子的)
所以这就是OG说为什么heirloom tomatoes没有predicate,因为后面的heirlooms抢了-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/2 22:01:04)
非常感谢,其他两个问题能否也给予一点帮助呢?
作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-2 22:18
umm,其实按照我刚才说的对句子结构的理解
你可以看出除了正确选项其他选项的结构都是不符合语法的(correctness永远是第一位的么!)
关于D选项,我也曾经对OG这个解释有疑惑,为什么有种解释的意味呢(umm,这里我觉得OG的解释不太好,至少如果在这题你能这样理解,其他句型你这样理解肯定就完蛋了);去掉although肯定是改变句意的
例如:born in GZ,Obama is a leader(按照OG的解释,奥巴马不在广州长大就不能当领导了?)但是这样的句子你很常见不是么?表强调么?no,just a extra information
PS:
关于D选项这个成分,究其根源就是一个modifier,modifier的作用是什么?provide extra information
可以提供关于一个动词(verb modifier)或者名词(noun modifier)一些额外的信息:例如(how/when/where/what/why)
这里OG的解释只是把这个modifier的角色理解成了why,但不是说明modifier放在前面就一定是解释why
正如你的comma+ving modifier不总是表达unavoidable consequence,也有可能是simultaneous action
hope it helps/open to discussion
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-3 17:02
很纠结你的这句话“这里OG的解释只是把这个modifier的角色理解成了why,但不是说明modifier放在前面就一定是解释why”,能否给予更多的帮助。
你觉得是不是前面修饰东西太多了?所以不能倒置?
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-3 17:03
umm,其实按照我刚才说的对句子结构的理解
你可以看出除了正确选项其他选项的结构都是不符合语法的(correctness永远是第一位的么!)
关于D选项,我也曾经对OG这个解释有疑惑,为什么有种解释的意味呢(umm,这里我觉得OG的解释不太好,至少如果在这题你能这样理解,其他句型你这样理解肯定就完蛋了);去掉although肯定是改变句意的
例如:born in GZ,Obama is a leader(按照OG的解释,奥巴马不在广州长大就不能当领导了?)但是这样的句子你很常见不是么?表强调么?no,just a extra information
PS:
关于D选项这个成分,究其根源就是一个modifier,modifier的作用是什么?provide extra information
可以提供关于一个动词(verb modifier)或者名词(noun modifier)一些额外的信息:例如(how/when/where/what/why)
这里OG的解释只是把这个modifier的角色理解成了why,但不是说明modifier放在前面就一定是解释why
正如你的comma+ving modifier不总是表达unavoidable consequence,也有可能是simultaneous action
hope it helps/open to discussion
-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/2 22:18:25)
看上面,谢谢啦。。
作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-3 18:01
umm...倒置那点不太明白你在说什么
作为一个modifier,尤其是noun modifier,只要它是很清晰的修饰那个noun,我觉得放在前面或者后面都可以
就像grown放前面,也是修饰tomatoes这个主语;放在S,ved,vo 这个结构,同样也是修饰主语tomatoes
Ved这个结构generally modify the closest noun
关于why那个问题,是不是放在句首的modifier才能表示成why的关系呢?(不见得)
记得OG有一题
bla bla were essential items,protecting....(这里的ving modifier就是一个extra information,说明why those items are essential,因为protect bla bla)
所以在上面那里,grown 放前还是放后都是合理的
OG的解释只是理清了潜在的从属关系:appear 的特征 has something to do with the modifier(就是生长的地方)
就像所有的modifier一样,他和main clause 必然有潜在的某种关系:而在这里,why这种关系更加符合逻辑,所以OG就说modifier和主句是一个所谓subtle cause-and-effect relationship
再举个例子:I lift something up,whistling “ oh,yeah“ (这里的modifier和主句的关系如果理解成why明显不符合逻辑,但理解成how就很好理解了、、我一边举起什么东西,一边说的什么)
so,you should use the context to understand the relationship between main clause and modifier(到底modifier是从什么角度present extra inform的,到底是how/what/when/where/什么的之类的关系)
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-4 16:49
umm...倒置那点不太明白你在说什么
作为一个modifier,尤其是noun modifier,只要它是很清晰的修饰那个noun,我觉得放在前面或者后面都可以
就像grown放前面,也是修饰tomatoes这个主语;放在S,ved,vo 这个结构,同样也是修饰主语tomatoes
Ved这个结构generally modify the closest noun
关于why那个问题,是不是放在句首的modifier才能表示成why的关系呢?(不见得)
记得OG有一题
bla bla were essential items,protecting....(这里的ving modifier就是一个extra information,说明why those items are essential,因为protect bla bla)
所以在上面那里,grown 放前还是放后都是合理的
OG的解释只是理清了潜在的从属关系:appear 的特征 has something to do with the modifier(就是生长的地方)
就像所有的modifier一样,他和main clause 必然有潜在的某种关系:而在这里,
why这种关系更加符合逻辑,所以OG就说modifier和主句是一个所谓subtle cause-and-effect relationship
再举个例子:I lift something up,whistling “ oh,yeah“ (这里的modifier和主句的关系如果理解成why明显不符合逻辑,但理解成how就很好理解了、、我一边举起什么东西,一边说的什么)
so,you should use the
context to understand the
relationship between main clause and modifier(到底modifier是从什么角度present extra inform的,到底是
how/what/when/where/什么的之类的关系)-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/3 18:01:53)
umm。。。解释的不错,非常感谢。我昨天从学校杀回来草草看了看就给你回复了,不好意思,问的不好。没表达完整,我的意思是:D是不是因为grown。。。。只是个表示解释的小东西,如果放在前面太强调了这么个小东西,所以把它移到了后面,紧跟着HT。如果放在前面就有种头重脚轻的感觉。
作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-4 17:00
umm,不觉得modifier的位置变化会有强调的意思。。。个人感觉modifier的移动更多的是改变意思
头重脚轻我觉得是关于一个句子的main skeleton的关系,如果你的主谓隔得太远(特别是你的modifier相当长),那就有一种头重脚轻的感觉
这里这个grown作为一个modifier,不算特别长,感觉放在前后都不太会影响对句子主干的理解
open to discussion
作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-4 17:57
umm,不觉得modifier的位置变化会有强调的意思。。。个人感觉modifier的移动更多的是改变意思
头重脚轻我觉得是关于一个句子的main skeleton的关系,如果你的主谓隔得太远(特别是你的modifier相当长),那就有一种头重脚轻的感觉
这里这个grown作为一个modifier,不算特别长,感觉放在前后都不太会影响对句子主干的理解
open to discussion
-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/4 17:00:11)
嗯,我想我是纠结于CD解释了,too much importance,让我认为强调感太重,不适合放前面,问题比较幼稚,劳烦您啦。
作者: Threesu 时间: 2012-9-4 19:31
看D选项~从逻辑意思来理解的话很容易变成:因为grown from the previous year才会发生less appetizing 的情况~这样就更改了原句意思了~这也使得本来一个默默地修饰heirloom tomatoes的句子变成了cause,从而改变句子的逻辑意思~
作者: ARG 时间: 2013-6-9 22:41
非常感谢
作者: enkyklios 时间: 2013-6-9 23:25
觉得B没有问题
作者: stephysit 时间: 2016-12-5 21:11
xiexie
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |