请教OG 18 的 111题

roberta

OG18的111题如下：OG 的解释如下：

Lines 34-38 （见下）indicate that in the early 1930’s it became illegal for a company

to maintain its own union with company funds. Thus, the passage suggests that prior to the 1930’s  a company was permitted to fund its own union.

lines 34-38的句子是：But it was only in the early 1930’s that federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company

money eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters’ representative.

可是从这句话只是说在early 1930's，federal legislation eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters’ representative. ,同时prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company

money是修饰federal legislation 的呀？即使这样，并不能推出1930年前的状态啊。不行了。。。我绕不出来了。。。呜呜。。

请大家帮帮偶，感谢！！

vincent0330

it was only in the early 1930's that federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative.

= [that federal legislation (prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money) eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative] was only in the early 1930's.

in other words, since such federal legislation happened only in the early 1930's, we can safely arrived the conclusion that before 1930's, there is no such federal legislation ,and companys can sustain their own union without any violating any laws.

roberta

wow~~ 狗狗真牛，解释的既详细又清晰

呵呵。。这道题偶明白了   

感谢狗狗！！

hpp920

= [that federal legislation (prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money) eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative] was only in the early 1930's.

我比较愚钝, 狗狗上面的分析我同意, 但我看不懂其他的解释. 我觉着only in the early 1930's是说federal legislation allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative这件事发生于early 1930's. 至于prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money我觉着从文中我们只能知道在early 1930's有此法案, 但only in the early 1930's并不是修饰prohibiting的, 所以至于在20年代该法案是否存在, 文中并没有交代.

我快疯了, 大家看我错在什么地方了?谢了先!!!

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-9-10 9:35:35编辑过]

roberta

别着急，大家都有过这种郁闷的感觉，慢慢来：）

我来试试看巴，你说的没错“我觉着only in the early 1930's是说federal legislation allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative这件事发生于early 1930's. ”，同时prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money又是修饰federal legislation的，所以可以推得在1930年以前是没有prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money的federal legislation的。

不知偶说清楚没有。。。

bigp

以下是引用roberta在2004-9-10 18:06:00的发言：

我来试试看巴，你说的没错“我觉着only in the early 1930's是说federal legislation allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative这件事发生于early 1930's. ”，同时prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money又是修饰federal legislation的，所以可以推得在1930年以前是没有prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money的federal legislation的。

谢谢roberta MM，还有狗狗的耐心解释，但是我还是有疑问：

it was only in the early 1930's that federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative.

这句话中的eventually强烈的暗示着这个federal legislation that prohibites a company from maintaining its own unions with company money在1930's之前就已经存在了。要不怎么会经过A同志不懈的努力，最终于1930's，这个legislation allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porter's representative哪？

请再指点，谢谢。

wangyu73cn

以下是引用bigp在2005-1-3 12:35:00的发言：

谢谢roberta MM，还有狗狗的耐心解释，但是我还是有疑问：

it was only in the early 1930's that federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters' representative.

这句话中的eventually强烈的暗示着这个federal legislation that prohibites a company from maintaining its own unions with company money在1930's之前就已经存在了。要不怎么会经过A同志不懈的努力，最终于1930's，这个legislation allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porter's representative哪？

请再指点，谢谢。

有道理。赞同。看来，我们应注意掌握eventually这个关键词。这提醒我们英文中副词的重要。

经过两个帖后，发现我其实不赞同“federal legislation that prohibites a company from maintaining its own unions with company money在1930's之前就已经存在了”这种理解的。具体解释见后两帖。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-7 0:29:10编辑过]

bigp

以下是引用wangyu73cn在2005-1-6 2:57:00的发言：


有道理。赞同。看来，我们应注意掌握eventually这个关键词。这提醒我们英文中副词的重要。

那么，能否烦请wangyu73版主GG指点一二哪？谢谢。

wangyu73cn

以下是引用bigp在2005-1-6 9:16:00的发言：


那么，能否烦请wangyu73版主GG指点一二哪？谢谢。

哈哈，我还说赞同你的观点呢。看来你自己还有更加深入的疑问啊，那我岂不是盲从了。^_^我虽然不太明白你到底在那里有疑问，但我自己的理解如下：

eventually这个词，即表达了在1930年代，最终实现了在法律方面将某公司和自己的工会剥离的结果，从而有利于Brotherhood这个独自成立的工会组织具备了发展的条件。也就是说，在1930年之前，是根本不具备这个条件的。因此，eventually这个词有着比较强烈的“取非”的含义。

以上是我的理解，不当之处，请指正。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-6 15:45:58编辑过]

bigp

偶的疑问是在该文章111题上。前边大家讨论了从But it was only in the early 1930’s that federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money eventually allowed the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters’ representative这句话中，能否看出federal legislation prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company中的federal legislation与1930年之前不存在，进而得出1930年之前公司是可以maintaining its own unions with company money。我的想法是得不出来。因为eventually表明，1930年前，这个prohibiting a company from maintaining its own unions with company money 的federal legislation就已经存在了，只不过是在1930年才最终将the Brotherhood to become recognized as the porters’ representative合法化。但这点与OG相驳，故而产生此问题。能否请再点拨。谢谢。