ChaseDream

标题: 求解OG13th 的 sc113！感谢感谢！！！~~~ [打印本页]

作者: yangyaci 时间: 2012-10-23 22:15
标题: 求解OG13th 的 sc113！感谢感谢！！！~~~
As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision, it would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind if it were an adult with such vision.
A.As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision, it would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind if it were an adult with such vision.
B.A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind as an adult.
C.As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb, its rudimentary sense of vision would be rated about 20/500; qualifying it to be legally blind if an adult.
D.A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500; an adult with such vision would be deemed legally blind.
E.As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb, its rudimentary sense of vision, which would deemed legally blind for an adult, would be rated about 20/500.

想请教大家一下
这道题中OG中B选项说the final phrase 是模糊的为什么模糊呢？
还有E选项中说which也是但是我觉得which就是直接指代的“sense of vision”，到底问题是出在哪了呢？

希望各位大侠能解答一下，感激不尽~

作者: DUKB24 时间: 2012-10-23 22:44
this excel may help you

this question also appear in OG12

作者: rainzh 时间: 2012-10-31 01:22
首选B选项中的 , or legally blind as an adult 的or这个连词使用的有问题。曼哈顿上说or是一个连词，那他应该连接并列的nouns或者并列的句子，此选项中or后面的成分不是一个句子也不是一个noun phrase。lz的理解如果是or 结构想要解释这个20/500的话，同位语a rate that应该可以用，但是用or是没有意义的。而且 as an adult也是一个歧义的表达。在这句话里面是没有比较的。
然后E选项which确实可以认为修饰sense of version,但是应该用被动would be deemed，就算改成被动，which修饰sense of version也是错误的，句意会变成sense of version would be deemed legal blind for adult. 正确的表达应该是有这种视力的成年人被认为是blind。所以which用在这里是不合适的。

个人意见，仅供参考哈~~请NN们指导~

作者: deedeezz 时间: 2013-3-8 11:41
D.A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500; an adult with such vision would be deemed legally blind.

请教would前面那个that的用法～我咋觉得这句没谓语啊～～

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2013-3-8 12:17

D.A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500; an adult with such vision would be deemed legally blind.

请教would前面那个that的用法～我咋觉得这句没谓语啊～～

-- by 会员 deedeezz (2013/3/8 11:41:11)

that would be rated about 20/500作为定语修饰 a rudimentary sense of vision。

作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-9-23 22:04

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-3-8 12:17
D.A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be r ...

同样是D选项我第一次看这个选项的时候把这排除了我觉得that指代不清楚呀是指代的baby还是指代的sense of vision? 是我想多了吗还是我根本想错了》请指点

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2014-9-24 09:59

joannahope 发表于 2014-9-23 22:04
同样是D选项我第一次看这个选项的时候把这排除了我觉得that指代不清楚呀是指代的baby还是指代的sense ...

建议你学习一下定语从句。

作者: gloriaaaaaa 时间: 2014-9-24 10:43

joannahope 发表于 2014-9-23 22:04
同样是D选项我第一次看这个选项的时候把这排除了我觉得that指代不清楚呀是指代的baby还是指代的sense ...

that 指代的是sense of vision啊~~这句的谓语是emerge

作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-9-24 13:26

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2014-9-24 09:59
建议你学习一下定语从句。

这句话我第一次看以为 a baby 是主语但是仔细看后发现不服逻辑定语从句也可以看成是noun modifiers 把通常情况下touch rule没有问题的但是在Manhattan中给出了几个exception的情况 eg he had a way of dodging opponents that impressed the scouts中这个that impressed the scouts 就是修饰了 a way的但是Manhattan得noun modifier exception中第一种情况当真让我迷惑说是the phrase(dodging opponents) that define the noun(a way) 说dodging。。。。是第一修饰语我这里理解为essential modifier 可是考试的时候我不会这样想如果让我改写句子我会认为 he had a way that impressed the scouts by dodging opponents.但是按照Manhattan的说法我就把 first modifier改变了是不是就不对了尼？如果考试我就会看看有没有语法的错误有没有逻辑的错误什么essential modifier 什么的我根本不会去想我这种思路是不是不对的？我是个刚看一个多月的小菜鸟希望nn 指点我

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2014-9-25 08:23

joannahope 发表于 2014-9-24 13:26
这句话我第一次看以为 a baby 是主语但是仔细看后发现不服逻辑定语从句也可以看成是noun modifiers ...

你如果把he had a way of dodging opponents that impressed the scouts中这个that impressed the scouts改成he had a way that impressed the scouts by dodging opponents. 那你就大错特错了，你就改变了句子的原本意思，使逻辑意思完全不同了。定语从句是就近修饰，所以你应该把a way of dodging opponents看成一个整体， that impressed the scouts就是修饰这个整体的，这里不需要机械的割裂dodging opponents和a way，从逻辑意思上看，that impressed the scouts也是对a way of dodging opponents整体的修饰和解释，拆开来了反而不对。

作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-11-2 09:31

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2014-9-25 08:23
你如果把he had a way of dodging opponents that impressed the scouts中这个that impressed the scouts ...

多谢啦再看这道题的时候有所感悟

作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-11-2 09:47

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2014-9-25 08:23
你如果把he had a way of dodging opponents that impressed the scouts中这个that impressed the scouts ...

关于那个noun modifier问题我不知道这样理解可不可以，touch rule 原则是基本遵守的个别现象的跳跃修饰虽然可以跳但是最多只能跳跃一个介词再远就不能再跳了会引起歧义了可以这样理解吗

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2014-11-3 09:14

joannahope 发表于 2014-11-2 09:47
关于那个noun modifier问题我不知道这样理解可不可以，touch rule 原则是基本遵守的个别现象的跳跃修饰 ...

我认为所谓“跳跃修饰”只是一种片面的形式上的解释。具体的修饰要看句子需要，A of B，that.......,有的时候不只对B进行修饰，而是针对整个词语，但有的时候A并不需要特别解释,但特别需要对B进行说明的，那就只针对B了。我认为如果进行长期大量的英语训练，自然就会有能力分辨这样的修饰。

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2014-11-3 09:15

joannahope 发表于 2014-11-2 09:47
关于那个noun modifier问题我不知道这样理解可不可以，touch rule 原则是基本遵守的个别现象的跳跃修饰 ...

作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-11-3 10:26

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2014-11-3 09:15
我认为所谓“跳跃修饰”只是一种片面的形式上的解释。具体的修饰要看句子需要，A of B，that.......,有的 ...

多谢我的确缺乏阅读方面今天第一天越障去了感觉好难哦有一点要问一下越障的时候可以做笔记吗

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