OG16 VERBAL 48题关于过去分词和现在分词的修饰

vi.len · 发表于 2016-8-8 19:00:12

A recent court decision has qualified a 1998 ruling that workers cannot be laid off if they have been given reason to believe that their jobs will be safe, provided that their performance remains satisfactory.

(A) if they have been given reason to believe that their jobs will
(B) if they are given reason for believing that their jobs would still
(C) having been given reason for believing that their jobs would
(D) having been given reason to believe their jobs to
(E) given reason to believe that their jobs will still

答案是A。

在CDE中，OG给出的解释是having/given之前没有逗号，所以直接修饰之前的名词 laid off。在论坛里面comma+v-ing的讨论比较多，但是关于没有逗号的modifier的讨论比较少。
所以我的问题是：1、是不是只要没有逗号，名词后面的现在分词/过去分词，都是直接修饰之前的名词的？
2、A中if引导的虚拟语气，为什么后面用的是will，不是应该would更合适吗？

ai559031 · 发表于 2016-8-8 20:30:47

，ving是非限定修飾
沒有逗號就是限定修飾
目前我看到正確句都是做形容詞修飾受詞（不過其實分詞片語也可以當作形容詞修飾主詞）

非事實、假設、猜測和想像：
If S+ were/ved+… S+would/could/should/might +V
If S+ had Ved+…  S+would/could/should/might +V
If S+ should/were to+ V
後面要有would/could

事實敘述：
If S+V(現在式)＋… S+V(現在式)
If S+V(過去式)＋… S+would V(過去式)
If S+V(現在式)＋… S+will/may+V

vi.len · 发表于 2016-8-8 20:37:07

ai559031 发表于 2016-8-8 20:30
，ving是非限定修飾
沒有逗號就是限定修飾
目前我看到正確句都是做形容詞修飾受詞（不過其實分詞片語也可 ...

恩，我懂你意思了。表示不是事实的，用would/could。表示是事实的，用will。
不过你说的If S+ had Ved+… S+would/could/should/might +V中，主句应该是S+would/could/should/might +HAVE DONE 表示与过去事实相反吧

ai559031 · 发表于 2016-8-8 20:54:39

是表示與過去事實相反沒錯，不過我的講義上是寫 had Ved (?)

vi.len · 发表于 2016-8-9 13:48:53

ai559031 发表于 2016-8-8 20:54
是表示與過去事實相反沒錯，不過我的講義上是寫 had Ved (?)

我的意思是If S+ had Ved+… S+would/could/should/might +V 应该是If S+ had Ved+… S+would/could/should/might +have done吧。

本贴相关题目 OG-2017V-SC-235OG-2017V-SC-235
OG-2016V-SC-48
... (DHDL)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

[SC悬赏令] OG16 VERBAL 48题关于过去分词和现在分词的修饰

所属分类: 下线版块

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 OG-2017V-SC-235OG-2017V-SC-235OG-2016V-SC-48 ... (DHDL)