http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=23&ID=16850
OG 语法一题与指代
234. The physical structure of the human eye enables it
to sense light of wavelengths up to 0.0005 millimeters; infrared radiation,
however, is invisible because its wavelength--0.1 millimeters--is too long to
be registered by the eye.
A. infrared radiation, however, is invisible because its wavelength--0.1
millimeters--is too long to be registered by the eye
B. however, the wavelength of infrared radiation--0.1 millimeters--is top long
to be registered by the eye making it invisible
C. infrared radiation, however, is invisible because its wavelength--0.1
millimeters--is too long for the eye to register it
D. however, because the wavelength of infrared radiation is 0.1 millimeters, it
is too long for the eye to register and thus invisible
E. however, infrared radiation has a wavelength of 0.1 millimeters that is too
long for the eye to register, thus making it invisible
Answer is A.
我的问题是：答案A中的 it 指代的是 infrared radiation， 而未划线部分的 it 指代的是 human eye, 在这里会不会有歧义？如果没有，是不是因为 分号 的缘故，如果两句子间是 逗号， 那么 ｉｔ 能不能指代不同的东东？
又如果通过逻辑关系能判断出在 逗号 连接的一个句子里，虽然 ｉｔ 指代的是不同西西，但还是能从意思上推出其指代的不同西西，是不是也算没有造成歧义，而是对的呢？
答案a中的两个it指代对象在这里会我认为不会有歧义，就是因为分号的缘故，在由分号分隔的前后句子中，同一代词可以指代不同的对象，因为前后是两个独立的句子。再见下例：
In this atmosphere, it is not fair to condemn
as failures all attempted experiments; it may
be more accurate to say many never had a fair trial.
第一个IT指代to condemn as failures all
attempted experiments；
第二个IT指代to say many never had a fair trial。
当然，这个例子与上题有些差距，但我想能够说明问题。
如果两句子间是逗号，那么，我认为IT不可以指代不同的西西；否则会引起混乱，严重的混乱。但如果一个是物主代词，一个是人称代词，则是可以的。请看下面的三个例子（当然，就本题来说，它也可以从下面的三个例子的角度来解释）：
下例中，蓝色的IT
(legislature)与ITS
(majority)所指并非同一东东。
When an individual or a party is wronged in the United States, to whom can he apply
for redress? If to the public opinion, public opinion constitutes the majority;
if to the legislature, it represents the
majority and implicitly obeys its injunctions;
if to the executive power, it is appointed by the majority and remains a
passive tool in its hands; the public troops consist of the majority under
arms; the jury is the majority invested with the right of hearing judicial
cases, and in certain states even the judges are elected by the majority.
230. In an effort to reduce their inventories,
Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell, and
they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have
ANSWER：C
“In general,” they reported, “the ability of the
compounds to compete at the receptors correlates with their
ability to stimulate locomotion in the mouse; i.e., the higher their capacity to bind at the receptors, the higher
their ability to stimulate locomotion.”
上面二例中，their与they指代的也非同一西西。
同意GEMJ版主的意见。在99%的情况下这一点是可用的：“如果两句子间是逗号，那么，我认为IT不可以指代不同的西西；”
但是即便是ETS在处理这个问题上也不是没有疏忽之处。大家看OG60
60. According to a recent poll, owning and living in a freestanding house on its own land is still a goal of a majority of
young adults, like that of earlier generations.
A. like that of earlier generations
B. as that for earlier generations
C. just as earlier generations did
D. as have earlier generations
E. as it was of earlier generations
答
案E.In E, the best choice, it refers unambiguously to the phrasal
subject "owning ... land", the verb was corresponds to
"is", and today's young adults are appropriately compared to earlier
generations.
显然，E中的it和未划线部分的on its own land不是指同一栋栋。
还有一个例子，2个it, 逗号分开，后面的it指代后面的不定势，而前面的it指代具体的人或者物。2者也不是指代同一东东。我现在找不到了。等我找到了再来更新。
＂但如果一个是物主代词，一个是人称代词，则是可以的。＂
如果是这样，那么如下题怎么解释？
159. While depressed property values can hurt
some large investors, they are potentially devastating for home-owners,
whose equity—in many cases representing a life’s savings—can plunge or even
disappear.
(A) they are potentially devastating for
homeowners, whose
(B) they can potentially devastate homeowners in
that their
(C) for homeowners they are potentially
devastating, because their
(D) for homeowners, it is potentially
devastating in that their（A）
(E) it can potentially devastate homeowners,
whose
如果they 和their可以指不同的事物．那么Ｂ就logical了．their指homeowners．
请ＮＮ解答！！～～～
Choice
A is the best. Its wording is unambiguous and economical. The plural pronoun they agrees with its antecedent, property values.
The pronoun whose clearly
refers to homeowners and efficiently
connects them with the idea of lost equity. In B, C, and D, substituting in
that their or because their for whose is wordy and confusing since the
antecedent of their might be they, not homeowners.
Furthermore,
can potentially
is redundant (由此判断，can 和potentially
意思上有重复的地方)
in B
and E. Both D and E use the singular pronoun it, which does not agree with its logical antecedent, property values.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-6-10 01:01:00
楼主