OG128和133：1. 名词+V-ing 的用法；2.“with“ cannot be followed by an independent clause？

billding

OG12 128.  Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an
aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel.
(A) that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving
(B) that has suggested the elephant descended from an aquatic animal, its trunk originally evolving
(C) suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
(D) to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
(E) to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved

疑问在OG关于C项的解释（标红处）：
C  Had descended is the wrong verb tense; with
cannot be followed by an independent clause.  请大牛说明下这句话是什么意思。先谢谢了。。。！！！

133. Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of
the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that
turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

OG在解释128的时候，并没有说C选项的suggesting 用法是错的，那么如果改写为正确的话：
suggesting that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved.  这显然是suggusting后加了一个从句。       可否？

OG133大家对此种用法的解释是：http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/ridley-turtle-t6594.html
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/post51809.html#p51809
participle modifying 这我倒理解，但我想问的是，这种用法具有普遍性？能否举一两个别的例子？


PS： 在贴  http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-397427-1-4.html  解释133是：
      “法律法规要用ing分词短语修饰”，不知道大家对这个解释怎么理解？下面是外国人的一个解释：

"laws to require..." isn't a correct idiom if you're discussing the actual text of the laws themselves. if you were discussing the ultimate purpose of those laws, then this could be idiomatic.
examples:
laws specifying long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> correct (___ing), since that's what the laws actually specify.
laws to specify long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> incorrect (that's not the ultimate purpose of the laws)
laws to discourage drunk driving --> correct (this IS actually the ultimate purpose of the laws)


总之，我最想问的是：上面两道题到用到 名词+ving, 这两道题的用法是否有共同之处？或者叫什么语法？  有什么规律？  （本来做128就是疑问，懒得发帖。。。心想就算了，但到133又遇到，不甘心，还是上来发帖，希望知道的，或者是也有疑问的跟帖留言。。。谢谢啦）

HarrisZheng

顶个！

evidence to suggest 感觉怎么解释啊？ evidence suggesting 行不行？

-- by 会员 Crystaljoy (2011/11/15 22:01:03)

可以， 就是分词做定语

Crystaljoy

顶个！

evidence to suggest 感觉怎么解释啊？ evidence suggesting 行不行？

helio5

我也对用动词不定式evidence to suggest that .... and that ... 很困惑。
后面的结构当然很好
但这个不定式用得实在不舒服
况且，OG在解释总则里面也说（就是ABCDE分项解释前面那段)
" A clear way of making this connection is to turn the verb suggest into a participle modifying evidence

lynnzhou83

不是NN. with cannot be followed by an independent clause.: 是因为WITH是介词，不是连词，不能接完整独立的句子。

billding

我自己顶一下吧。。。呼唤。。。