OG 1和OG 14 修饰对象的问题——定语从句跳跃修饰

OG 1 The Wallerstein study indicates that even after a decade young men and women still   

          experience some of the effects of a divorce occurring when a child.

(A)  occurring when a child

(B)  occurring when children

(C)  that occurred when a child

(D)  that occurred when they were children

(E)   that has occurred as each was a child

OG14 Paleontologists believe that fragments of a primate jawbone unearthed in Burma and estimated at 40 to 44 million years old provide evidence of a crucial step along the evolutionary path that led to human beings.

(A)  at 40 to 44 million years old provide evidence of

(B)   as being 40 to 44 million years old provides evidence of

(C)  that it is 40 to 44 million years old provides evidence of what was

(D)  to be 40 to 44 million years old provide evidence of

(E)   as 40 to 44 million years old provides evidence of what was

这两道题目都出现了 A of B 分词.....结构

我的问题是在这种情况下，分词修饰的应该是A 还是B?

OG1 说 Choice A incorrectly introduces the when... phrase with occurring, thus illogicallymaking divorce the grammatical referent of when a child

先不论when a child的错误。OG的意思 occurring when a child 是修饰 divorce的

就是A of B中的B.

但是在OG 14中，unearthed 和estimated 过去分词，修饰的到底是fragments of aprimate jawbone 中的fragments 还是jawbone???

个人感觉doing现在分词一般不跳跃修饰，如果要修饰A of B中的A一般改用that从句。

过去分词一般修饰A of B中的中心词，多数是A，有时也会是B，但这是似乎是靠意思来判断，至于是否要变成that is(等) done好些。感觉还是省了的略微多见些，说不准。

你提了个好问题，我个人也回答不清，看看其他斑竹和网友的意见。

谢谢，斑竹大人的回复

这个问题我和几个CDer也讨论过。最后的结论是

A of B that定语 其修饰的主体都应该是B

       A of B 分词，分词有可能是修饰A ，也有可能是修饰 B。

       具体的选择，要根据句子的逻辑意思来判定

至于现在分词和过去分词是否作用不同，未去找相应的例子总结。

但是OG 14中unearthed和estimated 修饰的是fragments,应该是没有什么问题的

可能还是得从逻辑意思上总体把握吧。

还得其他NN 释疑

对于你提到的这点，我有疑义。一下找不到合适的例子，拿下面一个凑个数吧：

大全254.        Dr. Sayre’s lecture recounted several little-known episodes in the relations between nations that illustrates what is wrong with alliances and treaties that do not have popular support.

(A) relations between nations that illustrates

(B) relation of one nation with another that illustrates

(C) relations between nations that illustrate

(D) relation of one nation with another and illustrate（B）

(E) relations of nations that illustrates

这题答案是有异议的。大全给的是B，that illustrates应该修饰the relation, 当然that的前的another不是实意名词，所以这个例子不算太好。另外有些网友认为应该选C, 姑且不论谁对谁错，C中的that illustrate意思上也应该是修饰relations，甚至有网友认为是修饰episodes。

我主要想说that 定语从句应该可以跳跃修饰前面介词短语中的中心词，包括A of  B（有时可以用主谓一致来强行修饰前者）, 当然可能我们遇到的题目中大多that是修饰B而非A, 但我想不应轻易排除我说的这种情况的可能性，个人感觉Gmat中绝对的东西少(多数是OG中提到的，字典或是其它语法书有时都不能轻易作为判断的依据）。

谢谢斑竹指正

那么我们是不是可以认为，修饰主体应该在逻辑含义允许的情况，就近优先呢？当然不是绝对的

GMAT中，绝对和相对的辨别是任重道远啊

引自LES NN http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=23&star=2&replyid=575650&id=65727&skin=0&page=1

看来我问的属于定语从句的跳跃修饰，等我多总结几道题目，找找共同点吧。

又找到一个例子

168. Today, because of improvements in agricultural technology, the same amount of acreage produces double the apples that it has in 1910.

(A)  double the apples that it has

(B)  twice as many apples as it did

(C)  as much as twice the apples it has

(D)  two times as many apples as there were

(E)   a doubling of the apples that it did

Choice B, the best answer, correctly uses the adverbial phrase twice as many... to modify the verb produces; properly employs many rather than much to describe a quantity made up of countable units (apples); and appropriately substitutes did for the understood produced to express the logically necessary past tense of produces. Choice A awkwardly substitutes the adjective double for twice; uses that without a clear referent; and misuses has to refer to events occurring in 1910. Choice C employs the incorrect much in a wordy construction and also misuses has. D is wordy and imprecise;... as there were in 1910 refers to all apples produced in 1910, regardless of location. E is illogical: since that refers to a doubling, E nonsensically asserts that the doubling occurred in 1910.

愚见:我觉得跳跃和就近都有可能,不能武断哪种肯定对.OG1就是明显的就近修饰,254则是跳跃修饰.

我觉得不能把修饰方向作为判断答案标准,可能从其他语法点着手.

A of B结构，除非有主谓一致的提示，不然只能逻辑判断。