- UID
- 1377987
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2018-12-14
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
地板
![](static/image/common/ico_lz.png)
楼主 |
发表于 2018-12-25 15:06:30
|
只看该作者
non-essential modifier 是相对于 essential modifier
non-essential modifier 只是起到补充作用的,没有了不会影响句子理解
essential modifier必须存在,没了句子无法理解了
Ron的解释:the differences rhetorical: if the modifier narrows the possibilities for the preceding noun, then you should use an essential modifier (no comma).
if the modifier doesn't narrow the possibilities for the preceding noun -- i.e., if the modifier were removed, you would still know exactly which noun you were talking about -- then it should be a nonessential modifier (set off by commas).
the only way you're going to be asked to differentiate between the two is if they give you a problem in which the context makes the distinction entirely clear.
for instance:
* Alvin Toffler, who wrote the book Future Shock in 1970, was remarkably prescient.
--> in this case, you must use a nonessential modifier, since there is only one "Alvin Toffler" to whom we could possibly be referrin
另外的一个解释:
(1) The builder, who erects very fine houses, will make a large profit.
(2) The builder who erects very fine houses will make a large profit.
The first example, with commas, and with three short intonation curves, contains a non-restrictive relative clause. It refers to a specific builder, and assumes we know which builder is intended. It tells us firstly about his houses, then about his profits. The second example uses a restrictive relative clause. Without the commas, and with a single intonation curve, the sentence states that any builder who builds such houses will make profits.
|
|