OG 54

motorola00 · 发表于 2003-12-16 00:47:00

54. Galileo was convinced that natural phenomena, as manifestations of the laws of physics, would appear the same to someone on the deck of a ship moving smoothly and uniformly through the water as a person standing on land.
(A) water as a
(B) water as to a
(C) water; just as it would to a
(D) water, as it would to the
(E) water; just as to the

C and D unnecessarily repeat “would” and wrongly use the singular it to refer to the plural phenomena. C and E each contain a faulty semicolon and produce errors in idiom, the same to X just as [it would] to.

请问 C and D ONLY unnecessarily repeat “would”, i personally think c and d unnecessarily repeat "it would" rather than "would". "it would"不是要省一起省吗？？

motorola00 · 发表于 2003-12-16 16:22:00

who can help??

carawayt · 发表于 2003-12-16 16:55:00

这道题你不用把它这么复杂化的，其实也就是一个对称的问题：

the same (to...) as (to...)

有时候不能钻牛角尖的哦：）

小女公子 · 发表于 2005-4-6 15:17:00

以下是引用motorola00在2003-12-16 0:47:00的发言：
54. Galileo was convinced that natural phenomena, as manifestations of the laws of physics, would appear the same to someone on the deck of a ship moving smoothly and uniformly through the water as a person standing on land.
(A) water as a
(B) water as to a
(C) water; just as it would to a
(D) water, as it would to the
(E) water; just as to the

C and D unnecessarily repeat “would” and wrongly use the singular it to refer to the plural phenomena. C and E each contain a faulty semicolon and produce errors in idiom, the same to X just as [it would] to.

请问把would删了，it单复改了，CD就可以了吗？

water，just as they to a

我怎么觉得不对？？

三脚猫 · 发表于 2005-4-6 21:06:00

我觉得也不对，the same...as ...是个固定用法，不能用分号隔开的

peajack · 发表于 2005-5-22 21:07:00

请问把would删了，it单复改了，CD就可以了吗？

water，just as they to a

我怎么觉得不对？？

wordy

ring_cheng · 发表于 2005-5-29 15:26:00

water（，just） as （they） to a

括号部分删掉一点歧义也没有，当删之。

另外请教一下：Because A lacks the preposition to, it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land. 这句话如何理解？

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-29 15:27:04编辑过]

EASYSUMMER · 发表于 2005-6-12 12:03:00

原来的意思是人和人比，现在成了现象和想象比了！

ring_cheng · 发表于 2005-6-23 21:38:00

it seems to compare the appearance of natural phenomena to that of a person standing on land.

再请问that of a person 中的that是指代前面的the appearance吗？如果是这样的话，这句话岂不是说“把自然现象的发生比作人的发生”？

可是原句好像并不是这个意思：

Galileo was convinced that natural phenomena, as manifestations of the laws of physics, would appear the same （to someone on the deck of a ship moving smoothly and uniformly through the water） as a person standing on land.

好像应该翻译成：自然现象的发生跟人一样。

原来的意思是人和人比，现在成了现象和想象比了！

不懂，能不能再请解释解释？谢谢啦。

薰衣紫草 · 发表于 2005-6-24 06:45:00

这句话还是要从伽俐略关于"物体相对运动原理"来解释. 大家都知道当一个物体运动的时候, 从他的参照物 (静止的物体)的角度来讲, 他在运动. 但如果从那个运动物体本身来讲, 运动的就是那个参照物. 所以运动是相对的.

原文就是要表述这个物理现象. 所以句子的结构理当如此.

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-SC-32OG-2015-SC-32
OG-13-SC-32
OG-12-SC-32
... (HEAT)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

OG 54

OG 54

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-SC-32OG-2015-SC-32OG-13-SC-32OG-12-SC-32 ... (HEAT)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

OG 54

OG 54

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-SC-32OG-2015-SC-32
OG-13-SC-32
OG-12-SC-32
... (HEAT)