ChaseDream

标题: OG13-35（DUKB24再来赐教下） [打印本页]

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-6 09:02
标题: OG13-35（DUKB24再来赐教下）

By 1940, the pilot Jacqueline Cochran held seventeen official national and international speed records,and she earned them at a time when aviation was still so new for many of the planes she flew to beof dangerously experimental design.

(A) and she earned them at a time when aviation was still so new for many of the planes she flew to be

(B) earning them at a time that aviation was still so new for many of the planes she flew to be

(D) earned at a time in which aviation was still so new such that many of the planes she flew were

(E) earned at a time when aviation was still so new that many of the planes she flew were
答案没问题，我在想换成earning可不可以？因为前面是过去式，ing不能修饰主语，所以只好就近修饰record。我又排除了自己的想法，我给了2种解释：
（1）逻辑不对，record是被earned，所以earned
（2）考虑后面也是过去形式，-ing不能再这里使用。
请大家指正下。
CD抽了，讲就看下，排版不好。

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-6 12:32
改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-6 21:45

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

可以改的么？我觉得不可以啊，我的理由就是那两条，请说服我。太谢谢你每次都回帖啦。感动死了。

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-6 22:21

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

可以改的么？我觉得不可以啊，我的理由就是那两条，请说服我。太谢谢你每次都回帖啦。感动死了。

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/9/6 21:45:21)

可以

还记得我之前说过的modifier的问题么。只要它和主句somewhat related你就能用...这里的ving和主句就是一个when的关系

ving是没有时态的，它的时态就跟随主句的main verb，所以这里时态是不存在问题的

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-6 22:35

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

可以改的么？我觉得不可以啊，我的理由就是那两条，请说服我。太谢谢你每次都回帖啦。感动死了。

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/9/6 21:45:21)

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 22:21:52)

受教了，我一直想着ing。。。排除情况就是表示同时发生，前面不能用过去式，然后想着想着就联想到时态上去了T-T

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-8 17:41

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

可以改的么？我觉得不可以啊，我的理由就是那两条，请说服我。太谢谢你每次都回帖啦。感动死了。

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/9/6 21:45:21)

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 22:21:52)

关于这题，我又有问题了，昨天在整理SC的时候发现，如果前面ing,后面时态是不能用过去式的。（例句由于疏忽，没记下来，但是肯定是这样的），如果这样的话，那么我的理解还对么？

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-8 17:50
没懂。。。。ving本身是没有时态的问题的

它的时态是依托于主句的....不太清楚你想表示什么

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-9-8 18:10

没懂。。。。ving本身是没有时态的问题的

它的时态是依托于主句的....不太清楚你想表示什么

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/8 17:50:24)

先留着哈，我找到了原句把句子贴上。。

作者: abjure 时间: 2012-9-8 19:17
哈哈，duke开始有江湖地位了。

作者: lumolumo 时间: 2012-9-11 16:39
我觉得earing挺好的其实，不知道大家怎么想？？

作者: abjure 时间: 2012-9-14 19:13

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

这题我刚做，也错了。

看了OG解释，我觉得不可以用earning.

earn是及物动词。所以B/C用即 pilot earning, 缺少后面宾语，不恰当。

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-14 19:19

改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂

关键还是后面的so that

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

这题我刚做，也错了。

看了OG解释，我觉得不可以用earning.

earn是及物动词。所以B/C用即 pilot earning, 缺少后面宾语，不恰当。

-- by 会员 abjure (2012/9/14 19:13:49)

我觉得还是so ...that...问题（如果earn是不及物的话。。。）

至于及物不及物。。。这个我同意。。。

太多这种东西了..肯定不会只有及物不及物的排除点..尼玛难不成还让我们把剑桥的及物不及物都看一遍

作者: abjure 时间: 2012-9-14 19:19

我觉得earing挺好的其实，不知道大家怎么想？？

-- by 会员 lumolumo (2012/9/11 16:39:57)

TMD，这题我让我深刻感觉到gmatOG13比OG12还要阴险的多。

我做这题，看到分词ed，以为是过去时，中间没有“and”和前面谓语动词（held）平行，向后找也没有“and”，就放心大胆的把v-ed排除了，一方面自己漏考虑 V-ED就近修饰的问题。另外一方面，主要就是像你说的，我觉得语义上the pilot earning 搭配起来挺顺口的，就没有往分词方面想。

做的我心惊肉跳。

不知道其他NN看出一些其他思路来没？

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-9-14 19:23

我觉得earing挺好的其实，不知道大家怎么想？？

-- by 会员 lumolumo (2012/9/11 16:39:57)

-- by 会员 abjure (2012/9/14 19:19:19)

从A选项得出思路

两个部分是related不是independent，还有so that的问题

。。。没看到so 。。。 that，就会被earning给坑了

作者: abjure 时间: 2012-9-14 19:49

我觉得earing挺好的其实，不知道大家怎么想？？

-- by 会员 lumolumo (2012/9/11 16:39:57)

-- by 会员 abjure (2012/9/14 19:19:19)

从A选项得出思路

两个部分是related不是independent，还有so that的问题

。。。没看到so 。。。 that，就会被earning给坑了

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/14 19:23:57)

说的好，有启发。说实话，今天昨晚OG13 新增21题，把握郁闷的不行。吃饭都比平时提早了一个小时，那就是化悲愤为食欲。。

快考试了，还是这个烂水平。。。。。不吐槽了，干正活

作者: wxtttt 时间: 2012-10-3 18:44
挖个坟。
刷第三遍的时候才彻底搞懂V-ING的用法。

个人觉得这里不能改EARNING，因为V-ING的用法是：
1）修饰主语和谓语 & 2）SIMULTANEOUS/IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE。

前一部分：HELD 17 RECORDS可以看出 2）说不通。

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 19:40

挖个坟。
刷第三遍的时候才彻底搞懂V-ING的用法。

个人觉得这里不能改EARNING，因为V-ING的用法是：
1）修饰主语和谓语 & 2）SIMULTANEOUS/IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE。

前一部分：HELD 17 RECORDS可以看出 2）说不通。

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 18:44:54)

just satisfy one of them is ok （ the first would have been better by changing in this way ： providing extra information for the preceding clause）

OG12 #30： For members of theseventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with woodenframes were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriorsagainst enemy arrows and spears.

if the sentence should satisfy the two requirement you have written， then it should not be correct..

open to discussion

作者: wxtttt 时间: 2012-10-3 20:14

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 18:44:54)

just satisfy one of them is ok （ the first would have been better by changing in this way ： providing extra information for the preceding clause）

OG12 #30： For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.

if the sentence should satisfy the two requirement you have written， then it should not be correct..

open to discussion

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 19:40:10)

DU大回帖真荣幸～

记不得哪个帖子挖出来的，应该是RON对V-ING的讲解，里面提到了两个必须都满足。

the"comma + ing" modifier should only be used when:

(A)
itMODIFIES THE ENTIRE ACTION of the preceding clause, and it APPLIES TO THESUBJECT of that clause;

AND

(B)
oneof the following is true:
(1)the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with, and SUBORDINATE to, the mainaction;
-i ran down the sidewalk, flapping my arms wildly
(2)the "ing" action is a DIRECTAND IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE of the mainaction.
-i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

--

sinceCOMMA + -ING clauses are automatically attributed to the SUBJECT of thepreceding clause, this modifies the moon.
asit clearly should, in context.

alsonote that it applies not only to that subject, but to the entire action of thatclause (this is what makes it "adverbial").

two problems with that choice:

1) when you use a COMMA -ING modifier after a clause**, you should actuallysatisfy TWO requirements:
-- the modifier should modify theaction of the preceding clause, as you have stated;
AND
-- the subject of the preceding clause should alsomake sense as the agent of the-ING action.

examples:
Joe broke the window, angering his father. -->this sentence makes sense,because it correctly implies that Joe "angeredhis father".
thewindow was broken byJoe, angering his father.-->this sentence doesn't make sense, because it implies that the window(i.e., notJoe himself) angered Joe's father.

my brothertricked me, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in my brother for tricking me (and notnecessarily disappointed in me for being tricked).
I was trickedby my brother, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in me because i fell for my brother's trick(and not that he's disappointed in my brother for tricking me).

OG12#30觉得应该是满足（B）的（2）的

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-10-3 20:26

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 18:44:54)

just satisfy one of them is ok （ the first would have been better by changing in this way ： providing extra information for the preceding clause）

OG12 #30：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.

if the sentence should satisfy the two requirement you have written， then it should not be correct..

open to discussion

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 19:40:10)

DU大回帖真荣幸～

记不得哪个帖子挖出来的，应该是RON对V-ING的讲解，里面提到了两个必须都满足。

the"comma + ing" modifier should only be used when:

(A)
itMODIFIES THE ENTIRE ACTION of the preceding clause, and it APPLIES TO THESUBJECT of that clause;

AND

(B)
oneof the following is true:
(1)the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with, and SUBORDINATE to, the mainaction;
-i ran down the sidewalk, flapping my arms wildly
(2)the "ing" action is a DIRECTAND IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE of the mainaction.
-i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

--

sinceCOMMA + -ING clauses are automatically attributed to the SUBJECT of thepreceding clause, this modifies the moon.
asit clearly should, in context.

alsonote that it applies not only to that subject, but to the entire action of thatclause (this is what makes it "adverbial").

two problems with that choice:

1) when you use a COMMA -ING modifier after a clause**, you should actuallysatisfy TWO requirements:
-- the modifier should modify theaction of the preceding clause, as you have stated;
AND
-- the subject of the preceding clause should alsomake sense as the agent of the-ING action.

examples:
Joebroke the window, angeringhis father. -->this sentence makes sense,because it correctly implies that Joe "angeredhis father".
thewindowwas broken byJoe, angeringhis father.-->this sentence doesn't make sense, because it implies that the window(i.e., notJoe himself) angered Joe's father.

my brothertricked me, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in my brother for tricking me (and notnecessarily disappointed in me for being tricked).
I was trickedby my brother, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in me because i fell for my brother's trick(and not that he's disappointed in my brother for tricking me).

OG12#30觉得应该是满足（B）的（2）的

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 20:14:38)

您好，看见你们顶起帖子，说下自己的粗鄙的想法：
这里不满足（2），（2）为表结果
i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

我参加了这个exam，导致了平均分。。。。
但是这里的句子For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.
animal-hides 是一种必要的items。。。有结果么？不可能是一个行为导致一个结果，所以不符合
其实因为这里是系动词were，不表示动作，所以ing只能就近修饰，这个系动词可以用来判断ing的作用。
open to discuss

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 20:32

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 18:44:54)

just satisfy one of them is ok （ the first would have been better by changing in this way ： providing extra information for the preceding clause）

OG12 #30： For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.

if the sentence should satisfy the two requirement you have written， then it should not be correct..

open to discussion

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 19:40:10)

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 20:14:38)

基本上OG上的RON解释我都看过了一下嘿

我还是认为如果两个同时满足的话太过严苛了。。。像OG的30题我不觉得是一个simultaneous action或者consequence

这里provide extra information for the preceding clause
说明 Q：how they are essential items
A： because they protect.....（感觉如果按照同时或者unavoidable来抓字面意思不太符合语境）

可以继续讨论

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 20:33

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 18:44:54)

just satisfy one of them is ok （ the first would have been better by changing in this way ： providing extra information for the preceding clause）

OG12 #30：For members of the seventeenth-century Ashanti nation in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows and spears.

if the sentence should satisfy the two requirement you have written， then it should not be correct..

open to discussion

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 19:40:10)

DU大回帖真荣幸～

记不得哪个帖子挖出来的，应该是RON对V-ING的讲解，里面提到了两个必须都满足。

the"comma + ing" modifier should only be used when:

(A)
itMODIFIES THE ENTIRE ACTION of the preceding clause, and it APPLIES TO THESUBJECT of that clause;

AND

(B)
oneof the following is true:
(1)the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with, and SUBORDINATE to, the mainaction;
-i ran down the sidewalk, flapping my arms wildly
(2)the "ing" action is a DIRECTAND IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE of the mainaction.
-i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

--

sinceCOMMA + -ING clauses are automatically attributed to the SUBJECT of thepreceding clause, this modifies the moon.
asit clearly should, in context.

alsonote that it applies not only to that subject, but to the entire action of thatclause (this is what makes it "adverbial").

two problems with that choice:

1) when you use a COMMA -ING modifier after a clause**, you should actuallysatisfy TWO requirements:
-- the modifier should modify theaction of the preceding clause, as you have stated;
AND
-- the subject of the preceding clause should alsomake sense as the agent of the-ING action.

examples:
Joebroke the window, angeringhis father. -->this sentence makes sense,because it correctly implies that Joe "angeredhis father".
thewindowwas broken byJoe, angeringhis father.-->this sentence doesn't make sense, because it implies that the window(i.e., notJoe himself) angered Joe's father.

my brothertricked me, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in my brother for tricking me (and notnecessarily disappointed in me for being tricked).
I was trickedby my brother, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in me because i fell for my brother's trick(and not that he's disappointed in my brother for tricking me).

OG12#30觉得应该是满足（B）的（2）的

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 20:14:38)

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/10/3 20:26:43)

这个例子可以有！

作者: wxtttt 时间: 2012-10-3 20:45

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/10/3 20:26:43)

觉得再自己想下就把自己绕进去了。微妙的感觉？
所以QIUHUA兄的观点是：如果MAIN VERB为系动词，V-ING则就近修饰么？
懂QIUHUA兄的REASONING，但个人觉得B中的（1）（2）总结出来就是一种伴随的状态/结果，所以仍然觉得是符合的。

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 20:55

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/10/3 20:26:43)

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 20:45:43)

你可以去看看jeffery总结的ving大全。就在语法区这里吧。那个帖子应该能表达所有我想表达的意思

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-764753-1-1.html

作者: wxtttt 时间: 2012-10-3 21:13

-- by 会员 qiuhua01234567 (2012/10/3 20:26:43)

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/3 20:45:43)

你可以去看看jeffery总结的ving大全。就在语法区这里吧。那个帖子应该能表达所有我想表达的意思

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-764753-1-1.html

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 20:55:48)

多谢，看完后更晕了。也就是说这个地方只修饰主语而不修饰谓语么？
倒推回去，既然只修饰主语，那么RON所说的(B)不必满足。
如果这样来理解VING会不会更简单一些：
1）修饰SUBJECT&VERB & 2）表伴随/结果

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 22:25
umm

从大处着眼...在看过很多instructor对于ving的解释..你可以看出ving的两种情况

comma+ving究其根源就是一个adverbial modifier

就像所有的modifier一样，它和main clause 必然有潜在的某种关系（若是independent就必须得用and来连接）

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）

而第二种就是一个unavoidable consequence/simultaneous action

事实上我觉得后者这个simultaneous action是可以被归为第一类（就像我刚才举的例子一样）

unavoidable这个太明显了,OG常考的知识点，一般来说大家都会看出来

所以来说，遇到ving；首先你要做的是，判定是从属关系还是equal importance的关系（用and，but，or连接的）

若是从属，eliminate the “and” choice

then，figure out the exact relationship ： why/how/what/when ？ simultaneous action？ consequence？只要有一个是满足的，就可以作为正确选项

作者: sisichen666 时间: 2012-10-3 22:55
个人小小看法啊，感觉最好还是不要变成earning，因为对于SVO，v-ing这种形式，v-ing可能引起修饰主语或宾语不清的歧义，除非是主系表的特例修饰主语，我感觉这本身就是v-ing的使用局限性，就像which的使用总会有人说我跳我跳我跳跃修饰xxxx,这意思不也是对的吗，但是which本身就近修饰N也不能排除呀，就造成了歧义呀，同理这也说明v-ing在GMAT语法中用来修饰主语和宾语语法上都是可以的。

做题过程中一般v-ing为正确答案时，错误答案都是which引导的定语从句错误地用来指代整句句子，在这种绝对错误下，v-ing的使用才显得更为优势。

所以这道题的突破点应该就是在其他的地方，so。。。that。。。与such的使用问题上

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-3 23:19

个人小小看法啊，感觉最好还是不要变成earning，因为对于SVO，v-ing这种形式，v-ing可能引起修饰主语或宾语不清的歧义，除非是主系表的特例修饰主语，我感觉这本身就是v-ing的使用局限性，就像which的使用总会有人说我跳我跳我跳跃修饰xxxx,这意思不也是对的吗，但是which本身就近修饰N也不能排除呀，就造成了歧义呀，同理这也说明v-ing在GMAT语法中用来修饰主语和宾语语法上都是可以的。

做题过程中一般v-ing为正确答案时，错误答案都是which引导的定语从句错误地用来指代整句句子，在这种绝对错误下，v-ing的使用才显得更为优势。

所以这道题的突破点应该就是在其他的地方，so。。。that。。。与such的使用问题上

-- by 会员 sisichen666 (2012/10/3 22:55:09)

对，sothat这个点没错

但是这里的ving并没有歧义

comma+ving只能修饰preceding clause，不存在歧义（OG12，neuroscientist，那题说drawing修饰adulthood的歧义是错误的！）

作者: wxtttt 时间: 2012-10-4 01:48

umm

从大处着眼...在看过很多instructor对于ving的解释..你可以看出ving的两种情况

comma+ving究其根源就是一个adverbial modifier

就像所有的modifier一样，它和main clause 必然有潜在的某种关系（若是independent就必须得用and来连接）

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）

而第二种就是一个unavoidable consequence/simultaneous action

事实上我觉得后者这个simultaneous action是可以被归为第一类（就像我刚才举的例子一样）

unavoidable这个太明显了,OG常考的知识点，一般来说大家都会看出来

所以来说，遇到ving；首先你要做的是，判定是从属关系还是equal importance的关系（用and，but，or连接的）

若是从属，eliminate the “and” choice

then，figure out the exact relationship ： why/how/what/when ？ simultaneous action？ consequence？只要有一个是满足的，就可以作为正确选项

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 22:25:20)

“所以来说，遇到ving；首先你要做的是，判定是从属关系还是equal importance的关系（用and，but，or连接的）"
感觉考V-ING的确这点更重要。从MEANING上入手，对解题相当有帮助！
嘛嘛，前面的讨论都是很细微的地方了。GMAC出的VING题应该都没问题了。

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-10-5 20:10

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/3 22:25:20)

-- by 会员 wxtttt (2012/10/4 1:48:57)

恩恩，meaning最重要，尤其OG13出现了之后。。。感觉meaning被又一次狠狠地强调了

作者: 映雪瑶渊 时间: 2012-10-6 01:55

哈哈，duke开始有江湖地位了。

-- by 会员 abjure (2012/9/8 19:17:31)

他一直都有。。

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-10-6 19:31

哈哈，duke开始有江湖地位了。

-- by 会员 abjure (2012/9/8 19:17:31)

他一直都有。。

-- by 会员映雪瑶渊 (2012/10/6 1:55:55)

这个果真可以有。。。

作者: clover928 时间: 2012-10-13 15:11
个人认为这个不可以改成earning啊。
RON说过关于SVO comma VING 作为modifier的时候：
one of the following is true:
(1) the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with, and SUBORDINATE to, the main action;
- i ran down the sidewalk, flapping my arms wildly
(2) the "ing" action is a DIRECT AND IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE of the main action.
- i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

（1）earn record by a time blablabla 不是JC held record 的siimultanesous action
(2)earn record by a time blablabla 不是JC held record 的immediate consequence，因为“拥有记录”的结果不可能是“这个记录是什么时间（or在什么情况下）拿的”

再说句子的intended meaning就是JC held record，ved修饰这个record是什么时候（or在什么情况下）拿的

个人意见。。open to discuss

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-13 15:17

个人认为这个不可以改成earning啊。
RON说过关于SVO comma VING 作为modifier的时候：
one of the following is true:
(1) the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with, and SUBORDINATE to, the main action;
- i ran down the sidewalk, flapping my arms wildly
(2) the "ing" action is a DIRECT AND IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE of the main action.
- i got a 100 on the most recent exam, bringing my average up to 91

（1）earn record by a time blablabla 不是JC held record 的siimultanesous action
(2)earn record by a time blablabla 不是JC held record 的immediate consequence，因为“拥有记录”的结果不可能是“这个记录是什么时间（or在什么情况下）拿的”

再说句子的intended meaning就是JC held record，ved修饰这个record是什么时候（or在什么情况下）拿的

个人意见。。open to discuss

-- by 会员 clover928 (2012/10/13 15:11:29)

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-761205-2-1.html

作者: clover928 时间: 2012-10-13 15:36

-- by 会员 clover928 (2012/10/13 15:11:29)

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-761205-2-1.html

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/13 15:17:56)

肥D你是让我看OG30题？
ving在这个句子中确实是provide extra info，但是这个是“主系表，ving”
ving肯定会修饰到那个shield

作者: tzhou7 时间: 2012-11-22 11:37
我也同意你的看法～～～～～～～

作者: Tranciy 时间: 2012-11-22 12:32
好贴留个名，豁然开朗

作者: yakev6 时间: 2012-11-26 12:32

-- by 会员 clover928 (2012/10/13 15:11:29)

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-761205-2-1.html

-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/10/13 15:17:56)

肥D你是让我看OG30题？
ving在这个句子中确实是provide extra info，但是这个是“主系表，ving”
ving肯定会修饰到那个shield

-- by 会员 clover928 (2012/10/13 15:36:22)

小顶下猫，这点我同意用ving不是很好。

JC hold a record, earning...
1. 主语JC和earn之间是主谓关系没问题
2. 但是earning 能修饰hold吗？
--能回答how，when，why，where等修饰动作的问题吗？
--即使你说能修饰how he hold a record, 那么 earning what？record ----对啦，归根到底还是要说earning record的，那么为啥不用earned 直接修饰record来的简单易读呢？

作者: yakev6 时间: 2012-11-26 12:36
这题争议颇多。
baby版主认为不能作为状语，参见
http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-740934-1-1.html?userid=-1&extparms=ThreadCatalogID%3d0
dukb24版主认为可以作为状语，见本帖。
Patrick_GMATFix 也认为可以做状语。http://www.beatthegmat.com/rhetorical-construction-diction-t117466.html
I don't have a problem with "earning"; it can introduce a modifier that gives additional information about the preceding clause. I'm not sure why the official explanation doesn't like "earning" because I don't understand the justification given.
My problem with C is the use of "where" to refer to "a time".
My problem with D is the use of "in which" to refer to "a time" and the presence of "such" in "so X such that..."
What I can say however is that if the author wishes for the underlined portion to describe records specifically, 'earning' is not well suited because -ing introduced modifiers that follow a comma typically modify the entire preceding clause or the subject at the head of that clause. To modify the noun just before the comma (ie "records"), the modifier should begin with a relative pronoun (ie "which were earned at a time..."), a noun (ie "a feat accomplished at a time...") or an adjective/past partiple ("earned at a time...") -Patrick

我个人比较倾向于babybearmm的理解。理由见36楼

作者: qiuhua01234567 时间: 2012-12-13 19:43

这题争议颇多。
baby版主认为不能作为状语，参见
http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-740934-1-1.html?userid=-1&extparms=ThreadCatalogID%3d0
dukb24版主认为可以作为状语，见本帖。
Patrick_GMATFix 也认为可以做状语。http://www.beatthegmat.com/rhetorical-construction-diction-t117466.html
I don't have a problem with "earning"; it can introduce a modifier that gives additional information about the preceding clause. I'm not sure why the official explanation doesn't like "earning" because I don't understand the justification given.
My problem with C is the use of "where" to refer to "a time".
My problem with D is the use of "in which" to refer to "a time" and the presence of "such" in "so X such that..."
What I can say however is that if the author wishes for the underlined portion to describe records specifically, 'earning' is not well suited because -ing introduced modifiers that follow a comma typically modify the entire preceding clause or the subject at the head of that clause. To modify the noun just before the comma (ie "records"), the modifier should begin with a relative pronoun (ie "which were earned at a time..."), a noun (ie "a feat accomplished at a time...") or an adjective/past partiple ("earned at a time...") -Patrick

我个人比较倾向于babybearmm的理解。理由见36楼

-- by 会员 yakev6 (2012/11/26 12:36:54)

我来顶顶吧。。希望你考试顺利

作者: stt300 时间: 2012-12-14 13:47
顶，本来认为自己掌握v-ing还不错，不过今天看到这个帖子发现还有理解不到位的地方啊。我想再问下ron的例子中： examples:
Joe broke the window, angering his father. -->this sentence makes sense,because it correctly implies that Joe "angeredhis father".
the window was broken by Joe, angering his father.-->this sentence doesn't make sense, because it implies that the window(i.e., notJoe himself) angered Joe's father.
这个是表结果的，逻辑主语是前面整句，我觉得这样说可以啊。为何ron说是the window？而且我之前也一直理解是前面整句，认为如果整句意思合理就可以comma+ing，没有考虑过主语。且og的例子23.Once designed withits weight concentrated in a metal center, the discus used in trackcompetition is now lined withlead around the perimeter, thereby improving stabilityin flight and resulting inlonger throws.
这个表结果前面的主语也是discus啊，discus不可能自己improving和resulting啊，是前面一整句的意思使得后面的结果产生。所以ron说的这个例子很不理解啊！

my brother tricked me, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in my brother for tricking me (and notnecessarily disappointed in me for being tricked).
I was tricked by my brother, disappointing Dad -->implies that dad is disappointed in me because i fell for my brother's trick(and not that he's disappointed in my brother for tricking me).
这个2个例子也是表结果，也是不太理解还有主语不同的区分，按照之前表结果的说法前面一整句的意思的结果是disappointing Dad，那应该都是一个含义“我的哥哥戏弄我”，所以“爸爸很失望”。还存在如上的区分吗？

作者: wellsli 时间: 2012-12-16 11:32
看了不如不看，gmat还是综合考虑吧?

作者: stt300 时间: 2012-12-16 21:32
这。。。更晕了。。。再顶一下nn解释解释，谢啦！

作者: stt300 时间: 2012-12-18 15:50
这个问题DUKB跟我又说了下，如果哪位cder也有疑问，大家看看吧，我觉得总的来说还是adv修饰subject+verb，如果subject是无关的，还是不太好。当然我觉得结合wellish说的也有一定道理，有时也是要评语感的。

· DUKB：当初我也有考虑过你这个问题，我觉得是一个ving的adverbila modifier主语合理性..举个例子： 2012-12-17 18:11:52

· 主动语态：Tom scored 83 in his final exam， thus raising his average score....被动语态：83 was scored by Tom in his final exam，thus raising his.... 2012-12-17 18:11:54

这里我觉得啊，主动例子是对的，被动是错的，就涉及一个主语的合理性问题...这里产生的结构是平均分提高了...尽管主体可能不是tom，可能是教务主任计算的他的平均分，但是Tom是这个动作的受体 2012-12-17 18:12:48

就是ving作为adverbial modifier的时候，主语最好是这个consequence的发出者或者接受者，相当于一个agent吧..然后这个被动语态的83分不太像是这一过程的..所以感觉不太合理

作者: 东方微白 时间: 2013-6-2 07:09
弱弱问一句：用earned不会造成两句没连词吗？那earned和held是什么关系呢？

作者: Feelalive 时间: 2013-6-3 22:54
DUKB24灰常感谢

作者: whitewoman 时间: 2013-6-22 17:12

DUKB24 发表于 2012-9-8 17:50
没懂。。。。ving本身是没有时态的问题的它的时态是依托于主句的....不太清楚你想表示什么 ...

D神，

1也就是说C选项中的earning的逻辑主语为主句主语。我们可以理解为发出动作earning的人为主句的主语the pilot是吗。那么我觉得C没啥问题，但是OG说earning离record近，所以我们认为record为动作发出者，故C错。
2我认为C错应该是由于where，D错由于such that吧，可以这样理解吗。
3以后解题时，我是否可以认为-ving分句之动作发出者就是主句主语，只要符合这个条件，我们就不认为他错在动作发出者上。可以这样运用的吗

感谢大神指导

作者: lminj 时间: 2013-7-18 21:28

作者: miyini 时间: 2013-8-6 21:20
看完之后豁然开朗，感谢NN们的耐心解答。。。。。。。

作者: SherlockedJohn 时间: 2013-11-23 19:11
越看越晕 V-ing真是永远的黑洞~太钻牛角尖只会痛苦~~

作者: 小蛋糕狂魔 时间: 2014-8-15 14:06
拙见一枚：
按RON的说法，两种情况
1）immediate，unavoidable consequence
前面held多少records是一个持续性的状态，且发生在earn之后，怎么能说逗号后面的是前面的consequence呢？
2）simultaneously，but lower priority
我觉得这点要结合DU大的能否回答how，when，why，where等问题来看
就算你说我回答how
那么难道是通过在xxx时间earn来held吗？
仔细想一想ving还是有逻辑漏洞的
但我还是觉得选项是比出来的，
前后两句话不是independent的，所以A不如，ving或者，ved好
但在这题里ving和ved比ving又不如ved好

作者: huizhuo0309 时间: 2014-9-2 19:45

DUKB24 发表于 2012-10-3 22:25
umm从大处着眼...在看过很多instructor对于ving的解释..你可以看出ving的两种情况comma+ving究其根源就是一 ...

then，figure out the exact relationship ： why/how/what/when

所以我觉得35题更应该选earning啊55555555。。
earning这句跟主语的关系就是when的关系，辅助解释了一下pilot到底是何时获得纪录的。。所以我一开始就用这个语法点把正确答案排除了。。
求大神赐教！！

作者: 笑小笑小蚂蚁 时间: 2014-9-28 09:32

clover928 发表于 2012-10-13 15:11
个人认为这个不可以改成earning啊。RON说过关于SVO comma VING 作为modifier的时候：one of the following ...

非常同意你的观点~~~~~~

作者: 素可清心 时间: 2015-10-11 17:49

abjure 发表于 2012-9-8 19:17
哈哈，duke开始有江湖地位了。

Mark一下！

作者: naosurai 时间: 2015-11-19 18:30
a） V-ing修饰名词时，只能修饰主句主语，主句的谓语必须是Be；
b） V-ing表示伴随状语时，其逻辑主语必是主句主语，即主语主语能够发出V-ing的动作，且V-ing动作发生在主句动作发生的过程内；
c） V-ing表示结果状语时，其没有单纯的逻辑主语，造成V-ing动作的原因是整个主句主谓描述的内容；

以上三点都不符合所以不能用earning

来源http://forum.chasedream.com/thread-764753-1-1.html

作者: Toddit 时间: 2015-12-1 21:00

naosurai 发表于 2015-11-19 18:30
a） V-ing修饰名词时，只能修饰主句主语，主句的谓语必须是Be；
b） V-ing表示伴随状语时，其逻辑主语必是 ...

In Greek theology the supreme being was Esaugetu Emissee (Master of Breath), who dwelt in an upper realm in which the sky was the floor, and who had the power to give and to take away the breath of life.

A.  in which the sky was the floor, and who had the power to give and to take
B . where the sky was the floor, having the power to give and to take

B选项就是主系表, 为什么B选项错了呢？

作者: naosurai 时间: 2015-12-2 00:25

Toddit 发表于 2015-12-1 21:00
In Greek theology the supreme being was Esaugetu Emissee (Master of Breath), who dwelt in an upper ...

分词doing作伴随状语用在主谓宾结构，主系表中系动词不能伴随

作者: Toddit 时间: 2015-12-2 15:46

naosurai 发表于 2015-12-2 00:25
分词doing作伴随状语用在主谓宾结构，主系表中系动词不能伴随

但是having可以作为定语修饰supreme being呢？

作者: 油闹家 时间: 2016-7-10 11:09
逗号加ing我已经研究两天了，好不容易都有点思路，看这个毁全部啊！！!!

作者: YVETTEWYW 时间: 2016-7-19 17:12

abjure 发表于 2012-9-14 19:13
改成earning没问题，这题OG解释太烂关键还是后面的so that-- by 会员 DUKB24 (2012/9/6 12:32:55)

这题 ...

同意！

作者: Faye527 时间: 2016-11-6 23:17

小蛋糕狂魔发表于 2014-8-15 14:06
拙见一枚：
按RON的说法，两种情况
1）immediate，unavoidable consequence

赞同你的看法，即一切答案都是比较出来的。
看到COMMA+VING，第一次可以看一下有没有其他地方可以先进行肯定的排除，例如固定搭配，就像这题的so that，和a time when，然后再用你暂时筛选剩下的答案再放进原句，第一遍或许你觉得earning才对，但读到earned，会发现earned修饰地更准确和简洁

作者: crannyzhang 时间: 2016-11-9 10:17
这道题也是存在了疑问，做几遍都错的。感谢之前的关于ving时态问题的解答，这道题后面看了看笔记觉得应该是v-ed与v-ing的modifier的问题。sentence,v-ing中的v-ing是对前面一整个句子的修饰，通常表示前面行为的一种结果。sentence,v-ed中的v-ed则是只修饰之前的名词。在这道题中，earn后的句子若是使用v-ing形式则会造成修饰逻辑上的不通

作者: 1984NY 时间: 2018-8-1 16:33
先留下啦

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