The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus Valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern Indian alphabets.
The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus Valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing {the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and} southern Indian alphabets.
(A) the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and
(B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the
(C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the
(D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and
(E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and
这里的B选项,我不可以看成主句主语为doer,从script中derive到这个alphabet吗?用sb derive sth from sth这个结构,看成与bringing并列
The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus Valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing {the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and} southern Indian alphabets.
(A) the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and
(B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the
(C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the
(D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and
(E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and
这里的B选项,我不可以看成主句主语为doer,从script中derive到这个alphabet吗?用sb derive sth from sth这个结构,看成与bringing并列
语义很重要啊。如果将derive和bring 作为empire的谓语动词,解释起来:empire到达了Valley,(他)戴着手稿,(他)来自于字母表。这是不符合逻辑的啊。
因为后面的“来自于”是用来修饰手稿的,所以which引导的部分应该与script更接近一些,所以选择的是C\D. CD的区别是from which derive 和 derives。这里是倒装结构。 还原回来是both the northern and the southern Indian alphabets derive from script. derive应该是复数的。
LS has done a great job in respect of meaning issues.
1.LZ cannot parallel "deriving" with "bringing".
bringing is comma+ing modifier here, and it's adv. modifier, which modifies the action in the proceeding clause.
What is the action in the proceeing clause?
"reach"!
derive has nothing to do with reach.
nonsense here.
rule out B&E
2.granted that the meaning is valid, the antecedent of "from which" is suspious.
rule out A&B
3.regarding agreement issues, if nothing before the verb can be the subject, then you have a backward construction. -- Ron 大神
so D out
4. another problem with e is it has a pronoun ambiguity, by which i mean the second usage of it.
E out again