ChaseDream

标题: og 上的语法题目 [打印本页]

作者: echowjx 时间: 2013-5-5 23:19
标题: og 上的语法题目
35.
By 1940, the pilot Jacqueline Cochran held seventeen official national and internatinal speed records, and she earned them at a time when aviation wa still so new for many of the planes she flew to be of dangerously experimental design.

A.
B. earning them at a time that aviation was still so new for many of the planes she flew to be
E. earned at at time when aviation was still so new that many of the planes she flew were

答案选E我认可。但是B错在哪里呢？og 的解释是：here, the word earning takes the pilot herself, not the records, as its subject. However, earning is close to the records, not th Jacqueline Cocbran, making this sentence hard to process.

个人观点：可以选择B，B可以作为便随状语，逻辑主语是Jacqueline Cochran.

作者: Thron 时间: 2013-5-5 23:47
（4）ing 形式在主系表结构中，可以修饰其前面紧跟的名词
（5）ing 形式在主谓宾结构之后，可以表示与谓语动词同时发生，表伴随，此时其逻辑主语就是主句的主语。
manhatten中文笔记中有提到
这题主句是主谓宾结构，所以earning的逻辑主语是piot,但是实际上earn应该去修饰records 所以错

作者: chineuro 时间: 2013-5-6 09:48

Thron 发表于 2013-5-5 23:47
（4）ing 形式在主系表结构中，可以修饰其前面紧跟的名词
（5）ing 形式在主谓宾结构之后，可以表示与谓语 ...

"但是实际上earn应该去修饰records 所以错" 何以见得？

sb. earn sth.
sth. be earned by sb.
主动被动都是可以表述的。earning没有问题，OG的解释是烟雾弹。

我认为B的问题在于
1. so...for的搭配显然有问题（我不记得so..for曾出现在正确答案里），在有so..that的选项时肯定后者好，
2. 即使so..for是对的，for表示“因为”，那么后面也应该是个完整的句子来表述原因。但文中many of the planes she flew to be of dangerously experimental design是个定语修饰的名词，意思表达不到位。

作者: Thron 时间: 2013-5-6 16:33

chineuro 发表于 2013-5-6 09:48
"但是实际上earn应该去修饰records 所以错" 何以见得？

sb. earn sth.

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT ... ogID%3d0%26page%3d2
这个帖子上已经写得很清楚了
OG的解释不是烟雾弹，错误是存在的，只是我们不一定有这个能力去明白。
B选项中却是有 time when / so that的固定搭配的小语法点考察，但是主要的还是修饰上确实出现了问题，不然人家也不会大费周章地把关于修饰的错误放前面写，In addition to 后面才写到so that了

作者: chineuro 时间: 2013-5-6 20:08

Thron 发表于 2013-5-6 16:33
http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-740934-1-1.html?extparms=ThreadCatalogID%3d0%26page%3d2 ...

A:the pilot Jacqueline Cochran held seventeen official national and internatinal speed records,
b:and she earned them at a time when ....
B完全可以理解为对A的进一步说明，特别是them指代records更确立了两者的联系。
与链接里这个帖子中举出的反例：
"He read OG for eight times, doing all the prep questions."
This sentence does NOT make sense.
完全不可相提并论。

至于Ron的解释，
我曾经在他的另一个帖子里看到：
(A)
it MODIFIES THE ENTIRE ACTION of the preceding clause, and it APPLIES TO THE SUBJECT of that clause;
AND
(B)
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
他举的第一个例子实际上很难作为一个标准来作为判定的依据了。因为是否simultaneously，是否subordinate不同的人判断可能不一样，有时可能是与否都能说通。个人认为GMAT的判定原则不太可能如此模糊，类似的选项中一定有更致命的错误以便排除。

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