ChaseDream

标题: 不定式用法求大神指教啊OG13 Q128&Q133~~~~~~~~~ [打印本页]

作者: 彼岸鸢尾yy 时间: 2013-9-13 11:40
标题: 不定式用法求大神指教啊OG13 Q128&Q133~~~~~~~~~
Q128Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel.
(A) that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving
(B) that has suggested the elephant descended from an aquatic animal, its trunk originally evolving
(C) suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
(D) to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
(E) to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved

Q133Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
Q133E中同样to require 做定语修饰名词laws 也是可以接受的。我看有的人说这里用不定式表达的是目的不能表达出法律的内容。可是按照manhattan来说，当不定式修饰名词时 "eg,a plan to conquer the world in his files. the author probably intends to say htat the plan is a means by which someone can conquer or will try to conquer the world. it is unlikely that the plan itself is actually conquering the world or will conquer the world "按照这种说法此处用不定式修饰law不表示目的也可以接受。Q128中to suggest 修饰evidence也可以按照此种方式理解。为什么Q128正确答案E可以，而Q133的E不可选？且128若用suggesting that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved 修饰evidence也是可以接受的，与 to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved 有区别么？
求大牛们指教啊~~不定式简直是硬伤啊~~~真是伤不起啊

作者: kiwifoodtown 时间: 2013-9-13 12:39
LZ，更深更细的问题不想讨论，单就128为什么不能选C简单的说一下，就suggesting如果修饰evidence来讲，你可以说它没什么问题，但C最大的问题却不是这个，而是句子结构和时态，首先，with后接名词结构不接整句，也就是说with its trunk originally evolved语法是错的，其次，the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal 不能用过去完成时态，而用一般现在时。
所以，128题唯一的结构和时态都正确的就是E，和to suggest没一点关系。
进而，仔细说起来，您的硬伤恐怕就不单是不定式这么简单了吧，基础语法过不过关才是您要考虑的问题。

作者: 彼岸鸢尾yy 时间: 2013-9-13 15:16

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-9-13 12:39
LZ，更深更细的问题不想讨论，单就128为什么不能选C简单的说一下，就suggesting如果修饰evidence来讲，你可 ...

这个我都明白啊~~~对128的E选项，我只是想拿它来说明不定式做修饰语不表示目的也没问题，而133的OG解释里却说明133的E选项表示to require obscures tge purpose of the laws.

作者: moontroy 时间: 2013-10-5 07:10
同问，我也觉得这个128正确选项里面的不定式有点奇怪。。。

作者: 彼岸鸢尾yy 时间: 2013-10-6 19:59

moontroy 发表于 2013-10-5 07:10
同问，我也觉得这个128正确选项里面的不定式有点奇怪。。。

这是一个外国instructor的解释，参考一下吧"evidence to suggest" and "evidence that suggests" are both acceptable in this sort of context. neither is a basis for elimination.

normally you would see "evidence that suggests..."
however, they've used "evidence to suggest..." here, in order to avoid writing evidence THAT suggests THAT xxxxx. not because it's wrong -- just because it's ugly.

作者: moontroy 时间: 2013-10-7 01:21
哦好的谢谢楼上

作者: flhuihui1001 时间: 2013-11-16 16:02
这里是不定式作modifier的情况， ron对此解释如下：
besides, there's more than one way to use an infinitive, anyway -- you have to (a) be more flexible in your thinking, and (b) use the meaning of the sentence.

for instance:
i need to buy brushes to paint.
i have a blank canvas to paint.

these are both correct, but the "to paint" modifier works differently in each case. in the first case, it's an intention (the meaning you're citing above); in the second, it describes an action whose object is the canvas (i.e., you're actually going to paint the canvas).

作者: flhuihui1001 时间: 2013-11-16 21:17
133 中不定式的用法是错的，无论是表示目的还是作modifier都说不通

作者: Jupiter1994 时间: 2016-9-25 17:42

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-9-13 12:39
LZ，更深更细的问题不想讨论，单就128为什么不能选C简单的说一下，就suggesting如果修饰evidence来讲，你可 ...

with那个可不可以看成是独立主格呢，逻辑关系是伴随。。。

作者: bonbonjon 时间: 2016-10-12 18:40

Jupiter1994 发表于 2016-9-25 17:42
with那个可不可以看成是独立主格呢，逻辑关系是伴随。。。

我觉得是独立主格，但是主格词和分词并不是逻辑上的动宾关系，所以分词不能用ed形式，我觉得可能是错在这里，也不太确定

作者: 鹅皇陛下万岁 时间: 2017-9-29 22:59

bonbonjon 发表于 2016-10-12 18:40
我觉得是独立主格，但是主格词和分词并不是逻辑上的动宾关系，所以分词不能用ed形式，我觉得可能是错在这 ...

如果是独立主格应该用逗号隔开吧？

作者: GMAT要上700 时间: 2017-10-9 16:24
我想请问一下为什么这里的A选项错误了？不能the elephant is the descended from an aquatic animal 和its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel平行？就是suggest that （the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal）and suggest that （its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel）
而一定要是that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal和 that its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel平行？

作者: Microscope 时间: 2017-10-27 14:09
顶楼主！

作者: krystalchenkkk 时间: 2017-10-28 19:17

bonbonjon 发表于 2016-10-12 18:40
我觉得是独立主格，但是主格词和分词并不是逻辑上的动宾关系，所以分词不能用ed形式，我觉得可能是错在这 ...

同意！with结构错在这个独立主格暗示evolve是被动的，是was evolved，并且with表伴随要和主句时态一致，其实应该是had been evolved，错上加错

作者: willing_ 时间: 2017-11-15 09:23

GMAT要上700 发表于 2017-10-9 16:24
我想请问一下为什么这里的A选项错误了？不能the elephant is the descended from an aquatic animal 和 ...

如果省略that 就无法判断后面是与“the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal”平行，还是与“Australian embryologists have found evidence that……”平行了

作者: LcR- 时间: 2018-5-27 17:17

彼岸鸢尾yy 发表于 2013-10-6 19:59
这是一个外国instructor的解释，参考一下吧"evidence to suggest" and "evidence that suggests" are bot ...

“not because it's wrong -- just because it's ugly.”哈哈哈哈笑死

作者: 怒考756GMAT无敌 时间: 2018-8-2 15:35
a

作者: Sonder 时间: 2018-8-9 15:48
求问B选项中，除了descend没有用被动，还有哪里错了呢？
(B) Australian embryologists have found evidence that has suggested the elephant descended from an aquatic animal, its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel.

作者: Sonder 时间: 2018-8-9 16:02
哈哈哈刚刚看到了Ron大神的解答.. 分享一下~
B选项中，-ING修饰语发生时间应该为过去时，和前句中现在时矛盾：
-ING modifiers SHOULD adopt the timeframe of the clause to which they are attached. The problem here is that we need to change the timeframe: "the elephant is descended..." is stated in the present, because it's a timeless fact about evolution, but "its trunk originally evolved..." needs to be in the past because it's an isolated historical event. the -ING modifier mistakenly suggests that both of these belong to the same timeframe.

作者: anmimiya 时间: 2019-5-30 20:05

bonbonjon 发表于 2016-10-12 18:40
我觉得是独立主格，但是主格词和分词并不是逻辑上的动宾关系，所以分词不能用ed形式，我觉得可能是错在这 ...

独立主格需要有逗号隔开，独立主格是不影响主句的语法结构的，只不过在意思上和主句有联系，虽然里楼主发帖都过去这么久了。。。但是希望以后有同样问题的人可以看到～

作者: sharon0119 时间: 2019-8-23 14:54
感谢分享！

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