ETS陷阱之一：关于定语和定语从句的位置问题.

海海 · 发表于 2004-1-10 01:15:00

109. Legislation in the Canadian province of Ontario requires of both public and private employers that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are usually held by men.
(A) that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are
(B) that pay for jobs historically held by women should be the same as for a job requiring comparable skills
(C) to pay the same in jobs historically held by women as in jobs of comparable skill that are
(D) to pay the same regardless of whether a job was historically held by women or is one demanding comparable skills
(E) to pay as much for jobs historically held by women as for a job demanding comparable skills

想借用本题讨论一下定语/定语从句的位置问题. 记得在XDF好象听到说, ETS的原则是定语/定语从句尽量紧跟在被修饰的名词后面. 而OG对这题的解释让我对这个问题有了点新的看法.

正确答案A 在jobs requiring comparable skill that are usually held by men中, 很明显jobs是被定语从句修饰的名词, job和定语从句并没有紧挨在一起. 由此可以推出结论（１）定语从句和被修饰的名词不需要紧挨在一起

另外OG关于选项B,D和E的解释很有意思:
in choices B, D, and E, the wording illogically describes the comparable skills rather than the jobs as being “usually held by men.

也就是说:
B) ...a job requiring comparable skills usually held by men
D) ...one (job) demanding comparable skills usually held by men
E) ... a job demanding comparable skills usually held by men

usually held by men 都去修饰skills了．　由此是否可以推出结论（２）做定语的成份（可以是分词，　不定式等等）只修饰前面紧挨着的名词

一家之言，　大家来讨论一下．　最好能再找几个例子，　发现有例外的情况最好．

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-1-10 1:32:50编辑过]

Snazzy · 发表于 2004-1-10 01:51:00

Several points:
1, It's true that, most of the times, the attributive clauses should follow the the modified words. However, there is always an exception, which is that there may have something between whenever it doesn't cause ambiguity.  In this case, the author uses "skill" instead of "skills" in order to  avoid ambiguity by making "are" to refer to "jobs". It's just a perfect expression.
2, The reason why there is such a  exception, I think, is that those good writers always use long sentences to express their thoughts. Reverse is another example.
3, Sometimes, ETS' explanation, which always use universal terms,  doesn't make so much sense. English native speakers know how to say and write it, but it is very hard to give a what we think of a plausible explanation. So it is our responsibility  to figure out why.
4, 由此是否可以推出结论（２）做定语的成份（可以是分词，　不定式等等）只修饰前面的紧挨着的名词
This sounds right for me.

海海 · 发表于 2004-1-10 01:53:00

正好OG的下一题也有点关系：　

110. It has been estimated that the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy in lost industrial output and tax revenues is at least $20 billion a year.
(A) the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy in lost industrial output and tax revenues is at least $20 billion a year
(B) the annual cost of illiteracy to the United States is at least $20 billion a year because of lost industrial output and tax revenues
(C) illiteracy costs the United States at least $20 billion a year in lost industrial output and tax revenues
(D) $20 billion a year in lost industrial output and tax revenues is the annual cost to the United States of illiteracy
(E) lost industrial output and tax revenues cost the United States at least $20 billion a year because of illiteracy

OG的解释是：　
Choices A, D, and E are awkward and confused because other constructions intrude within the phrase cost... of illiteracy: for greatest clarity, cost should be followed immediately by a phrase (e.g., of illiteracy ) that identifies the nature of the cost.

cost to the United States of illiteracy不够清晰，　介词结构（of illitercy)做定语要紧跟着被修饰的名词cost后面表达才清晰

ＥＴＳ喜欢把句子的成分搬来搬去，　造成语意的混淆．　状语也是ＥＴＳ喜欢折腾的东西．希望有人找些例子出来．

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-1-10 1:59:17编辑过]

turtlechen · 发表于 2004-1-10 01:57:00

同意二位的看法。
結論一：定语从句和被修饰的名词不需要紧挨在一起
因為兩種情形都見過，無法推翻！

結論二：做定语的成份（可以是分词，　不定式等等）只修饰前面的紧挨着的名词
印象中是這樣的。不知有無反證！

KillG8 · 发表于 2004-1-12 16:10:00

从另外角度，补充一下：

根据LZM对名词几种修饰方法中，

有Noun, +Ving, that clause 。为双重修饰，所以that 离先行词较远。因为ving在逻辑上必须紧跟逻辑主语，比定语从句更紧迫。

另外，
LZM 还提到的一个双重修饰为，noun, which, of sth。但是，我好像没有见过实例。不知是否有nn实战中用过。

KillG8 · 发表于 2004-1-12 17:08:00

49. The cameras of the Voyager II spacecraft detected six small, previously unseen moons circling Uranus,which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting the distant planet
(A) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
(B) doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known to orbit
(C) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known in orbit around
(D) doubling to twelve the number of satellites now known as orbiting
(E) which doubles to twelve the number of satellites now known that orbit

又是一个绝佳的实例。

ETS陷阱之一：关于定语和定语从句的位置问题.

ETS陷阱之一：关于定语和定语从句的位置问题.

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()