ChaseDream

标题: OG13 SC 115 求助啊~~~~~~ [打印本页]

作者: wudchun 时间: 2013-8-8 17:51
标题: OG13 SC 115 求助啊~~~~~~

115. Because there are provisions of the new maritime code that provide that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas, they have already stimulated international disputes over uninhabited islands.

(A) Because there are provisions of the new maritime code that provide that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas, they have already stimulated

(B) Because the new maritime code provides that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas, it as already stimulated

(C) Even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas under provisions of the new maritime code, already stimulating

(D) Because even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas under provisions of the new maritime code, this has already stimulated

(E) Because even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas under provisions of the new maritime code, which is already stimulating

C选项OG 说the sentence does not make clear what is stimulating … disputes.可是在这里这个Ving phrase不能做结果状语表伴随吗？而且under provisions of the new maritime code是属于none modifier就要遵循touch rule，是这样解释吗？求nn解释啊

作者: skyemotion 时间: 2013-8-8 18:00
伴随状语的主语和主句的主语一致。
原文的主语应该是code，而不是tiny islets

作者: wudchun 时间: 2013-8-8 18:05
哦~~我以为做结果状语时只要能表示是前一个句子的结果，就不用管主语是否一致了~~~~~~~~~谢谢NN了~~~~~~~~~

作者: 要努力 时间: 2013-8-21 08:12
"under provisions of the new maritime code" 按照原文意思应该做整个句子的状语，但是按照C选项，摆在sea areas 之后，就有可能被理解为修饰限定sea areas (sea areas as defined under provisions of the new maritime code)，这个与原意不符，会引起混淆

作者: wudchun 时间: 2013-8-31 18:10
感谢感谢~~~~~

作者: enkyklios 时间: 2013-8-31 21:44
--------------------

作者: mengzj 时间: 2014-8-16 15:27
B选项中 it指代new maritime code 可以指代这么远吗！= =我觉得我好像跟modifier的touch结构弄混了。。。代词木有说是非要紧挨所指代的词吧，所谓的指代不清是不是说一个代词前有几个n并且都可以make sense？
混乱了，求指正= =

作者: ashlyzhu 时间: 2014-8-16 16:02

mengzj 发表于 2014-8-16 15:27
B选项中 it指代new maritime code 可以指代这么远吗！= =我觉得我好像跟modifier的touch结构弄混了。。。代 ...

这句话可以这样理解：因为某某干了什么事，所以它。。。。所以it指代new maritime code.听起来挺顺的

还有C选项，完全颠倒了句子的重心，从句变主句了，主句变成分词结构了

作者: mengzj 时间: 2014-8-17 06:47

ashlyzhu 发表于 2014-8-16 16:02
这句话可以这样理解：因为某某干了什么事，所以它。。。。所以it指代new maritime code.听起来挺顺的

还 ...

嗯O(∩_∩)O谢谢

作者: gmatcder 时间: 2015-4-9 03:23
"这句话可以这样理解：因为某某干了什么事，所以它。。。。所以it指代new maritime code.听起来挺顺的"

但是D选项的代词-this 也离的很远，为什么OG说他指代不明？求哪位指点

作者: ritasmiling 时间: 2015-5-12 15:30
这句话中的even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas如何理解？

作者: 卡卡女爵 时间: 2015-5-17 16:50

gmatcder 发表于 2015-4-9 03:23
"这句话可以这样理解：因为某某干了什么事，所以它。。。。所以it指代new maritime code.听起来挺顺的"

但 ...

this指代啥?你必须手指着某个东西说this is an apple,this 才能表示是apple,你不指,没人知道你指啥啊？

作者: 卡卡女爵 时间: 2015-5-17 16:51

ritasmiling 发表于 2015-5-12 15:30
这句话中的even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea ...

你就把这个even tiny islets当作钓鱼岛好了，小岛没什么，就是容易引起各种渔业和石油开采的权利争端。这个一个国际法上的领海领空的问题。

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