ChaseDream

标题: 求解og 13-106 非限定性定語從句到底能不能跟先行詞隔開？ [打印本页]

作者: atto 时间: 2013-6-22 09:18
标题: 求解og 13-106 非限定性定語從句到底能不能跟先行詞隔開？
看完曼哈頓，關於非限定性定語從句我注意到跟我們平時印象不一致的2個點:
1. 非限定性定語從句不能修飾整個句子（這是幾乎所有native speakers每天都在犯的錯誤）；
2. 非限定性定語從句也跟限定性定語從句一樣必須緊跟先行詞。

關於第二點，OG13上面大多數題都堅持了這個原則，但是106題似乎是個意外。

Originally developed for air pollutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology and criminology.

(A) Originally developed for air pollutants, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(B) Originally developed for air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton-included X-ray emission
(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-included X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-included X-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,
(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton-included X-ray emission,

該題中which引導的非限定性定語從句顯然修飾的是a technique而非X-ray emission，但官方的答案給的就是A。
所以請問各位高手，是我對GMAT的原則理解錯了，還是對這道題本身分析有誤？

望解答，不勝感激！

作者: suzibi 时间: 2013-6-22 09:41
proton-included X-ray emission就是a technique，是一个东西，which修饰谁都没有问题，我是这么理解的。
B: having有修饰air pollutants的嫌疑，错
C&D called有修饰air pollutants的嫌疑
E:quickly要紧跟修饰词analyze，在这位置错，而且这句话真的好啰嗦啊，而且改变原句的意思，错

作者: atto 时间: 2013-6-22 09:45
啊，太對了，我居然沒有注意到a technique跟proton-included X-ray emission指的是同一種東西！茅塞頓開啊，多謝了！
所以，“非限定性定語從句也跟限定性定語從句一樣必須緊跟先行詞”這個原則是對的？

作者: suzibi 时间: 2013-6-22 10:00

atto 发表于 2013-6-22 09:45
啊，太對了，我居然沒有注意到a technique跟proton-included X-ray emission指的是同一種東西！茅塞頓開啊 ...

不一定啊，有时候会跳跃修饰，要看句意了，但大多数时候是紧跟先行词了

作者: atto 时间: 2013-6-22 10:05
連這道題都不例外了，說明GMAC確實是堅持了這個原則的。不過我覺得你說得也對，在不導致歧義的情況下應該也是可以跳跃的吧。

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