念念不忘的with

wangjieava23 · 发表于 2012-3-4 21:53:34

12-86The results of the company's cost-cutting measures are evident in its profits, which increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it fell over the last two years.

A. which increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it fell
B. which had increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it had fallen
C. which have increased five percent during the first three months of this year after falling over the last two years
D. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after falling
E. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after having fallen

in general, "COMMA + prep phrase modifier" is an adverbial modifier, meaning that it modifies the entirety of the preceding clause. in this sentence, we don't want an adverbial modifier, since it doesn't make any sense for this modifier to apply to the entire preceding clause. rather, we want a modifier that will only modify the noun at the end of the preceding clause (i.e., "profits"). since this is the exact function of a "which" modifier, that's the modifier we want here.

这是manhatten instructor 的话

翠儿卡 · 发表于 2012-3-10 16:21:43

LZ, 我对如何排除D也有疑惑, 一开始我判定的是它修饰歧义即既可理解为状又可理解为定，但语法笔记上只说了它作状修饰全句不合逻辑……

SO！

是因为comma的作用吗？如果未加comma就可能出现修饰歧义的情况？如果加了comma就只可能理解为状，再用逻辑去判断，是这样吗？

babybearmm · 发表于 2012-3-10 17:38:54

这句话，把D带进去读
The results of the company's cost-cutting measures are evident in its profits, with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after falling over the last two years.

我特意标出了"a five percent increase"
这就好比有的题目中出现的错误选项"a ratio of 1:41" "a number in 1997"
我想请问: 这里的increase, ratio, number到底指什么？
不知道。
有没有明确定义？
没有。"five percent" "1:41"这些叫做赋值，不叫做定义。

a five percent increase in results （如果"results"可以量化，例如表示成百分制成绩）
a five percent increase in the cost-cutting measures （如果"measures"可以量化）
a five percent increase in its profits
以上理解都符合逻辑啊，所以这就是ambiguity.

对比正确选项
comma+which 就是典型的noun modifier，而noun modifier通常遵从touch-rule，所以就是毫无歧义地修饰profits，说的是"profits have increased five percent".

一个是毫无歧义，一个是有歧义，当然选前者。

12-86The results of the company's cost-cutting measures are evident in its profits, which increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it fell over the last two years.

A. which increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it fell
B. which had increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it had fallen
C. which have increased five percent during the first three months of this year after falling over the last two years
D. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after falling
E. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after having fallen

in general, "COMMA + prep phrase modifier" is an adverbial modifier, meaning that it modifies the entirety of the preceding clause. in this sentence, we don't want an adverbial modifier, since it doesn't make any sense for this modifier to apply to the entire preceding clause. rather, we want a modifier that will only modify the noun at the end of the preceding clause (i.e., "profits"). since this is the exact function of a "which" modifier, that's the modifier we want here.

这是manhatten instructor 的话

-- by 会员 wangjieava23 (2012/3/4 21:53:34)

wangjieava23 · 发表于 2012-5-4 09:38:07

LZ, 我对如何排除D也有疑惑, 一开始我判定的是它修饰歧义即既可理解为状又可理解为定，但语法笔记上只说了它作状修饰全句不合逻辑……

SO！

是因为comma的作用吗？如果未加comma就可能出现修饰歧义的情况？如果加了comma就只可能理解为状，再用逻辑去判断，是这样吗？

-- by 会员翠儿卡 (2012/3/10 16:21:43)

刚发现，我一直对with怕怕的。

贴这个帖子也是为了，总结一种with的用法。但是是不是",+with..."都是这样的用法，我现在也不是很清楚。再次继续总结吧。

To baby,

没有想到，你可以过来，谢谢你指点。观点完全接受。我原来一直在with 指代上转圈圈，没有仔细看with后面的意思。你说的很对的。

wangjieava23 · 发表于 2012-5-4 14:44:03

结合baby的说法和这个帖子的讨论：

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-551448-1-1.html

", which+clause” 这样的表达方法是就近修饰前面的名词的。这个我验证很多次了，我相信是对的。

", with+n+adj/done/doing” 这样的表达方式应该是修饰前面句子的句中动词。

jetyxo · 发表于 2012-5-4 14:59:31

貌似Prep中出现的with做定语的情况都会被判有歧义的，因为又可以作状语来修饰全句，本人理解也不是很透彻，但大抵记住这一条，嗯，遇到with也会怕怕地

wangjieava23 · 发表于 2012-5-18 17:00:13

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline.
(A) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang
(B) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs were hanging
(C) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(D) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(E) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung

OK.

In the case where a modifier begins with a RELATIVE PRONOUN (like 'who', 'whose', 'which', and the like), that pronoun usually needs to be placed directly next to the thing it's modifying; in other words, that thing needs to be placed right before the comma.

Prepositions like 'with', however, can refer more abstractly to the action in the sentence, rather than the noun immediately preceding the comma. In the sentence you've cited, 'with arms and legs dangling' is best described as an adverb phrase: a prepositional phrase that modifies 'sleeping'. In general, prepositional phrases - especially adverb phrases like this one - need not necessarily appear right next to the verb they modify; such juxtaposition would often make the sentence sound downright weird (try placing that phrase right next to 'sleeping' and see what happens).

Go back and check the examples in which the modifier goes with the word right next to the comma; the vast majority of them, if not all of them, should involve relative pronouns.

找的这个解释了。with 修饰的是Sleeping。

这点很重要呀，注意这里with引导的修饰的是sleeping, 而不是我一贯理解的see。

wangjieava23 · 发表于 2012-5-18 17:09:49

LZ, 我对如何排除D也有疑惑, 一开始我判定的是它修饰歧义即既可理解为状又可理解为定，但语法笔记上只说了它作状修饰全句不合逻辑……

SO！

是因为comma的作用吗？如果未加comma就可能出现修饰歧义的情况？如果加了comma就只可能理解为状，再用逻辑去判断，是这样吗？
-- by 会员翠儿卡 (2012/3/10 16:21:43)

逗号在这里是一个判断条件。

没有逗号的时候，成了it profits with a 5 percent increase.... 这样with就成了profits的定语了。
it profits, which have....这里的which是profits 的非限制性定语，
it profits, with.... with就是修饰前面的动词的状语，也就是are evident.

（我现在还很迷惑，with，Ving这样的形式能不能修饰主系表的动词。）
隔了这么久，才能回答这个问题。

但是下面这个句子，我又解释不了了。
The end of the eighteenth century saw the emergence of prize-stock breeding, with individual bulls and cows receiving awards, fetching unprededented prices, and exciting enormous interest whenever they were not on show.

念念不忘的with

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()