- UID
- 251053
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2007-6-30
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
想了半天也选了c ,实在觉得A的,Ving不合理 
去查了大神的解释，别晕菜，大神们也晕了
Ron的解释 ：
We are retiring this problem in its current form, because it has several issues.
First, as you point out, "which" is not necessarily wrong here.
Second -- and more importantly -- the ostensibly correct answer to this problem doesn't actually work.
In choice A, the modifier "sporadically erupting..." does not describe anything in the preceding part, so it doesn't make sense as a "comma + __ing" modifier (which must meaningfully describe the subject+action of the preceding sentence).
Incidentally, choice A of the Dickinson problem (OG12 #26) is wrong for exactly the same reason!
This problem is no longer in our database. It will be replaced by an updated (and fully correct) version soon.
Because the problem is no longer in the database, this thread is now retired.
大神mike的解答：
One grammatical feature that appears in this sentence is the sequence of tenses. The geologist "thought" something in the past, so the verbs describing the content of what they thought should follow the rules of the sequence of tenses.
When the geologist were alive and doing this "thinking," they thought that in their own present time, the lava was a remnant. This is in the geologists' present time, so it should be in the same tense as we use for the geologists, the past tense. We need the past tense, "was," not the past perfect "had been," nor the hypothetical "would be." We can eliminate choices (B) & (D).
Choices (A) & (C) & (E) are identical up to the comma, and then have
(A) ... sporadically erupting = fine, the correct tense
(C) ... which sporadically erupted = also the correct tense, but a bit wordier
(E) ... having sporadically erupted = changes the tense from the prompt, so this changes the meaning
In (A) & (C), the "erupting" is also in the geologist present time, the same time the remnants existed. In the prompt, all three happen in the same general time period: (1) the geologist thinking, (2) lava was a remnant, and (3) the erupting. Both those choices keep those three events in the same time period. Choice (E) puts the erupting in an earlier time period from the others, and that's a change in meaning, so (E) is wrong.
Both (A) & (C) are grammatically & logically right, but (C) is a little wordier, so (A) is the best.
Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
另外一大神：
nestly, one compelling reason to deny "of Earth's earliest days" mission-critical status is precisely to avoid using concision to choose A. I'm not convinced that "it's too wordy" is ever the sole flaw with an answer choice, other than in cases of redundancy.
In any case, there's no good reason to override the touch rule here. There are better ways to express the same idea, and "remnant of Earth's earliest days" is not clearly all one thing, as in "the price of oil," "the queen of Spain," or "the jar of peanut butter." However, the surest way to cut out C may be to look at what happens when we remove the troublesome modifier:
Geologists once thought that the molten rock known as lava was an underground remnant, which sporadically erupted through volcanoes, but they now know that it is continuously created by the heat of the radioactivity deep inside the planet.
From this perspective, the use of "which" doesn't even make sense. We should use the restrictive "that": "lava was an underground remnant that sporadically erupted . . . " This more clearly conveys the intended meaning and maintains parallelism between the two contrasting descriptions of what lava is and does. Now we can cut C with a clear conscience and without invoking the dread W word.
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2018-10-2 22:03:29
收藏
收藏
楼主
