OG SC 55 请教~~~~

wcc333 · 发表于 2013-4-25 11:05:09

Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs
that enable a family with insufficient savings for a
conventional down payment to be able to move into
new housing and to apply part of the rent to a
purchase later.
(A) programs that enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to be
able to move into new housing and to apply
正确(B) programs that enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to
move into new housing and to apply
(C) programs; that enables a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to
move into new housing, to apply
(D) programs, which enables a family with
insufficient savings for a conventional down
payment to move into new housing, applying
(E) programs, which enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to be
able to move into new housing, applying

其中D选项中说：Enables does not agree with the plural subject; applying following a nonrestrictive clause suggests incorrectly that the builders, not the family,are applying the rent.
忽视enables的错误，是不是如果把which前面的逗号去掉了，D就对了？？我的主要问题是，关于ing的修饰问题，也就是说，如果一个主句跟着一个限制性从句的时候，ing分词从句是不是修饰那个限制性从句的？？而如果一个主句跟着一个非限制性从句的时候，ing分词从句是修饰主句的？？？

万分感谢~~~

bejamin1111 · 发表于 2013-4-25 11:42:00

亲，逗号去掉也不对，是fragment。但从这个句子来看，ving的修饰与前面的which从句没什么关系。comma+ving一般修饰主句谓语动词或者这个句子，逻辑主语是主句主语。

wcc333 · 发表于 2013-4-25 14:32:41

bejamin1111 发表于 2013-4-25 11:42
亲，逗号去掉也不对，是fragment。但从这个句子来看，ving的修饰与前面的which从句没什么关系。comma+ving ...

谢谢啊，感觉总是有你在回复~~

但是怎么就fragment了呢，这句话去掉逗号精简为：
Many house builders offer programs，applying.... 主句主语谓语不是都有么。
comma+ving我也认为一般修饰主句谓语动词或者这个句子。但似乎前段时间看到一题貌似是因为ving离主句太远了，然后就有了修饰从句的嫌疑。不过记性不哈，现在也不大确定，所以来论坛问问，到时我再碰到这个题的时候在回复你~

DesmondWang · 发表于 2013-4-25 14:51:31

这个要看语义的，我在曼哈顿上问过这个问题，一般来说是修饰最近的clause，也就是如果有that从句，修饰that从句的主谓；但是也有跳过从句的主语，修饰主句主语的

bejamin1111 · 发表于 2013-4-25 18:46:17

wcc333 发表于 2013-4-25 14:32
谢谢啊，感觉总是有你在回复~~
但是怎么就fragment了呢，这句话去掉逗号精简为：
Many house ...

前面的那个有谓语动词。。我错了

bejamin1111 · 发表于 2013-4-25 18:56:20

bejamin1111 发表于 2013-4-25 18:46
前面的那个有谓语动词。。我错了

我感觉回答问题是在帮助他人中成长自己。我是菜鸟，我也希望进步。。。
不过关于comma+Ving还有一种解释和你分享下：这种结构从未失去做定语的功能，也就是修饰preceding noun，以下是个例句：
In a plan to stop the erosion of East Coast beaches, the Army Corps of Engineers proposed building parallel to shore a breakwater of rocks that would rise six feet above the waterline and act as a buffer, absorbing the energy of crashing waves and protecting the beaches.
这里absorbing修饰preceding noun“buffer”

wcc333 · 发表于 2013-4-28 23:46:39

bejamin1111 发表于 2013-4-25 18:56
我感觉回答问题是在帮助他人中成长自己。我是菜鸟，我也希望进步。。。
不过关于comma+Ving还有一种解释 ...

好几天没登录了。。是啊，好像还是要看语意来分析的~

wcc333 · 发表于 2013-4-28 23:48:54

DesmondWang 发表于 2013-4-25 14:51
这个要看语义的，我在曼哈顿上问过这个问题，一般来说是修饰最近的clause，也就是如果有that从句，修饰that ...

对的~~我记得我也是哪里看到过

shaoqirui · 发表于 2013-5-20 22:07:07

是的，我也对于这个存疑，因为“， ing”的用法是
A. it modifise the entire action of the preceding clause, and it applies to the subject of that clause.注意：preceding clause是前面的从句，而不是主句，applies表示直接的、间接的都可以
B. one of the following is ture: a.)the -ing action is simultaneous with, and subordinate to, the main-action b.)the -ing action is a direct and immediate consequence of the main-action

shaoqirui · 发表于 2013-5-20 22:33:43

OG13 66 the Army Corps of Engineers proposed building parallel to shore breakwater of rocks that would rise six feet above the waterline and act as buffer, absorbing the energe of crashing waves and protecting the beaches.
这里absorbing就是指向了从句，难道在非限制性定从中，就要忽略掉从句，直接指向主句？

OG SC 55 请教~~~~

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()