ChaseDream

标题: 请教：同位语还是独立主格？蒙圈了 [打印本页]

作者: 哎唷不小心 时间: 2013-10-2 21:32
标题: 请教：同位语还是独立主格？蒙圈了
There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

A. There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

B. There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished.

C. There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.

D. Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished. (A)

E. Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished.

这题选A没问题啦，我纳闷的是：a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.这句是应该是同位语没错吧，但是同位语一般前面不是要有一个先行词嘛。但是从逻辑意义上来看，我感觉是前面的这个legal limits 是后面circumstance...的逻辑主语。这样一来，不应该用独立主格嘛？比如改成There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance contributing to their depletion through overfishing.
请教各位NN这里是肿么一回事？？？灰常感谢~

作者: wyw1018 时间: 2013-10-2 22:16
这个同位语是总结前面整句话，所以没有先行词

作者: 哎唷不小心 时间: 2013-10-3 10:16

wyw1018 发表于 2013-10-2 22:16
这个同位语是总结前面整句话，所以没有先行词

同位语可以修饰前面整句话么？

作者: lunabanbi 时间: 2013-10-3 10:39
能，句末概括性同位语，只能用a/an引导，不能用the
GWD里面就有出现过
Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than it was in any previous election.
这里面红色的部分就是同位语

作者: 哎唷不小心 时间: 2013-10-3 11:06

lunabanbi 发表于 2013-10-3 10:39
能，句末概括性同位语，只能用a/an引导，不能用the
GWD里面就有出现过
Soaring television costs accounted ...

啊~原来如此，非常感谢。我想顺便问一下独立主格的名词前面能加冠词吗？

作者: lunabanbi 时间: 2013-10-3 11:34

哎唷不小心发表于 2013-10-3 11:06
啊~原来如此，非常感谢。我想顺便问一下独立主格的名词前面能加冠词吗？ ...

这个原来木有看到过，但是我百度了一下，应该是可以的。。。
这是里面给的例句
The meeting being over, all of us went home. 开完会后我们都回家了。the meeting being over相当于when the meeting was over
He wrapped her up with great care, the night being dark and frosty. 夜又黑又冷，所以他把她裹得严严实实的。as the night was dark and frosty

作者: 哎唷不小心 时间: 2013-10-3 14:57

lunabanbi 发表于 2013-10-3 11:34
这个原来木有看到过，但是我百度了一下，应该是可以的。。。
这是里面给的例句
The meeting being over, ...

那不定冠词可以吗，比如说这题我改成……，a circumstance contributing to their depletion through overfisihng？

作者: lunabanbi 时间: 2013-10-3 23:32

哎唷不小心发表于 2013-10-3 14:57
那不定冠词可以吗，比如说这题我改成……，a circumstance contributing to their depletion through ove ...

我还是觉得这个题不能用独立主格，独立主格的两个句子间应该有逻辑关系，而且我看到有说独立主格的作用相当于状语从句，比如表示时间、因果、条件...比如The job finished, we went home. 这个说明了时间，工作结束后，我们回家了。或是More time given, we should have done the job much better.这个类似于条件状语，如果给我们更多时间，我们能做得更好。这个题是说对于M鱼，没有对于C鱼和D鱼的那种法律，这个情况导致了....circumstance指代的是前面的那种情况，也就是前面的句子。是解释说明，而没有那种类似于状语从句的关系，应该用同位语。
我对独立主格不熟悉，不能到能不能解释这里，求大牛指导。。。

作者: 哎唷不小心 时间: 2013-10-4 16:35

lunabanbi 发表于 2013-10-3 23:32
我还是觉得这个题不能用独立主格，独立主格的两个句子间应该有逻辑关系，而且我看到有说独立主格的作用相 ...

嗯，我再看看两者的用法，非常感谢耐心的解答~

作者: 小晶晶晶 时间: 2017-11-29 11:13
句尾同位语和【,V-ing】或【with独立主格】结构不可随意互换，同位语是句尾名词的定语，描述的是事物的具体内容、特征，是一种解释，后二者是主句的伴随状语，意味着与主句同时发生的另一件事。

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