还是prep的问题。。。谢谢~~

布布布布布丁 · 发表于 2011-11-8 19:10:19

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.
A. that included
B. which includes
C. including
D. some of which were
E. among them being

选项分析：
A．引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。
B．根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。
C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。
D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。
E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。

为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？

vinbobo · 发表于 2011-11-8 21:18:38

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.
A. that included
B. which includes
C. including
D. some of which were
E. among them being

选项分析：
A．引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。
B．根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。
C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。
D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。
E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。

为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？

-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好
including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了
不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了

布布布布布丁 · 发表于 2011-11-9 00:45:40

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A．引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B．根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

vinbobo · 发表于 2011-11-9 07:38:31

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A．引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B．根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/9 0:45:40)

饿，简单的说
修饰名词需要靠近修饰，但是这里修饰语和名词之间隔了两个修饰词，因此太远
介词形式修饰的是句子，所以句子到哪里，就修饰到哪里，但是，根据绝大多数题目，逗号后面介词组在修辞上并不是修饰posts，而是修饰句子的，所以理论上跟句子的主语关系更近。不知道这么说你觉得如何

vinbobo · 发表于 2011-11-9 07:45:20

另外，这里修饰的对象是“ to several posts”

布布布布布丁 · 发表于 2011-11-9 13:54:49

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A．引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B．根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

-- by 会员布布布布布丁 (2011/11/9 0:45:40)

饿，简单的说
修饰名词需要靠近修饰，但是这里修饰语和名词之间隔了两个修饰词，因此太远
介词形式修饰的是句子，所以句子到哪里，就修饰到哪里，但是，根据绝大多数题目，逗号后面介词组在修辞上并不是修饰posts，而是修饰句子的，所以理论上跟句子的主语关系更近。不知道这么说你觉得如何

-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/9 7:38:31)

唔，介词词组修饰整个句子？有木有例句支持这种说法啊

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2008E1-SC-187 (BVBP)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

还是prep的问题。。。谢谢~~

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()