介词的修饰问题的例外

OG里面我看了几乎所有的介词做定语修饰都就向前就近修饰（名词或动词）的，介词短语的修饰是没有逻辑意思根据的，比如火山在信里爆发那题，很荒谬。with短语也因为既能修饰前面的名词和句子主语而产生歧义。可是有下面两题是例外

50.   As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision, it would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind if it were an adult with such vision.

(A) As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision, it would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind if it were an adult with such vision.

(B) A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500, or legally blind as an adult.

(C) As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb, its rudimentary sense of vision would be rated about 20/500; qualifying it to be legally blind if an adult.

(D) A baby emerges from the darkness of the womb with a rudimentary sense of vision that would be rated about 20/500; an adult with such vision would be deemed legally blind.（D）

(E) As a baby emerges from the darkness of the womb, its rudimentary sense of vision, which would deemed legally blind for an adult, would be rated about 20/500.

In choice A, it, the subject of the main clause, seems to refer to baby, the subject of the subordinate clause; thus, A seems to state that the newborn baby, rather than its sense of vision, would be rated 20/500. Similarly, choices B and E use awkward and ambiguous phrasing that suggests that the sense of vision, rather than an adult with 20/500 vision, would be considered legally blind. C incorrectly uses the semicolon, which should separate independent clauses, to set off a verb phrase. The phrase if an adult in C is also illogical, since it states that a baby could also be an adult. D is the best choice.

这里的with并没有修饰前面临近的名词womb，而是跳跃修饰了a baby

这题也是

with 是例外:

with 考点

(1) with修饰的对象是逻辑宾语

(2) with可以跳跃修饰,像OG里猴子爬树上那个.

(3) with后面不跟完整主谓结构

谢谢mm，只有with一个例外的吧？

而且我看nn们都是把with和without当成一个词来总结的，但就我看几乎所有without没有做过定语的，全部做状语，想知道without是不是基本都做状语呢？

大部分介词短语都是可以做定语和状语的，优先做定语并没有说明就不能做状语。关键还是在逻辑意思。

with和without在修饰作用时功能基本相同~

不是做修饰功能时不同，如without有时有语气（虚拟语气、强烈语气）的含义。

我觉得好像很多介词修饰都不管逻辑意思的，介词要做状语但前面有名词就说是修饰歧义的，比如火山在信里爆发啦~

我在og里看基本做状语的都是有逗号的with放在句尾。而作为有歧义的错误选项的都是没有逗号的with要作状语，可前面却有名词。

是不是呢？？

256. The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(A) The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(B) To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(C) The only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(D) Writing the only eyewitness account, Pliny the Elder's nephew accounted for the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(E) In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

我的理解是...eruption of Vesuvius in two letters可以是信里面描述火上爆发。也就是PE的侄子提供了唯一的对于“写给Tacitus信里描述道过火山爆发”目击证据（也即指PE的侄子是唯一的看到过“写给Tacitus信里描述道过火山爆发”的人）。

---

open to discuss

675        Studies show that young people with higher-than-average blood pressure and their families have a history of high blood pressure are more likely than others to develop a severe form of the condition.

(A) and their families have a history of high blood pressure

(B) whose families have a history of high blood pressure

(C) and a history of high blood pressure runs in the family

(D) whose families have a history of high blood pressure running in them（B）

(E) with a history of high blood pressure running in their family

这题我才发现的，with是就近修饰错了，whose却可以跳跃了

还有我1楼的2个例子啊~~~没人帮忙说说么？后面用with就没有就近修饰前面名词的歧义了么？？？