OG12 110在这个题目中我问个非主流的独立主格的奇葩问题吧

zhongshanlh

110. Published in Harlem, the owner and editor of The Messenger were two young journalists, Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader.

(A) Published in Harlem, the owner and editor of The Messenger were two young journalists, Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader.

(B) Published in Harlem, two young journalists, Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader, were the owner and editor of The Messenger.

(C) Published in Harlem, The Messenger was owned and edited by two young journalists, A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader, and Chandler Owen.

(D) The Messenger was owned and edited by two young journalists, Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader, and published in Harlem.

(E) The owner and editor being two young journalists, Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, who would later make his reputation as a labor leader, The Messenger was published in Harlem.

抛开这个题目中关于A选项和其他几个选项中关于who指代是否清晰的这个历史遗留问题不说（如果哪位CDer有好想法也一起分享了吧）

我在看到E选项时候关于E选项前半部分的独立主格的结构有了不同于OG解释的看法，OG对E选项的说明是：Being introduces an awkward construction

但是仔细看E发现前面是一个独立主格结构，独立主格——表示伴随，作状语，主句需要是主谓宾结构，那么按照独立主格的使用方法来看E中的这前半部分，并没有错误啊？还是我忽略了什么问题么？

wangjieava23

恩。

所以，同位语和独立主语，都是遵循某种逻辑关系出现在句子里。 训练，训练，对句子结构件“关系”的处理。

teddybearj4

今天想clarify独立主格这个点，看到了bat斑斑的回答，受益匪浅！
不论是独立主格、同位语、简单的V-ed，V-ing的noun. modifier都必须要遵守语意至上去选择使用。（突然感觉我在说废话。）
独立主格是能够有自己独立主语的一个省略了动词形式的从句（这句话自创的，就是独立主格的n.+n. 能够还原成一个完整的状语从句或者是主句的并列句。）是“a word group that modifies an entire sentence”。
1、表示条件或者原因的状语从句变成的独立主格：
e.g.: His first marriage having ended in divorce and his second in despair, Norton vowed never to marry again.
2、表示伴随或者说明情况的并列句。
e.g.: Six boys came over the hill, running hard, their heads down. (情况说明或者是伴随)
e.g.: John comes to shore, the sea water gushing from his mouth and nostrils. (伴随)

同位语是直接修饰前一句提到的object或relations，用一个noun.可以用noun.来表示。而且通常这个noun是泛指不是特指的。

V-ed作noun. modifier一定是遵从touch原则的。不论是前面有没有comma。

而V-ing作noun. modifier的时候也是遵从touch原则的，但是如果有comma与noun.隔开的话可能会变成verb.modifier作伴随状语或者是结果状语修饰一整句话。

---------
再看E
The owner and editor being two young journalists, The Messenger was published in Harlem.
看过独立主格的正确句子之后就会体会到，这个前面和主句的逻辑关系真的很弱啊！通过语意，前后两个分句的意思很难联系到一起。
后来看到llssyy93的回复之后才恍然这个关系是弱在了哪里，实际上就是少了主句和独立主格的一个所有格，表明动作的发出者。
详见我上面独立主格的3个例句，独立主格里面都是出现所有格表示把两个结构联系在一起的。从这就可以看出，如果要用独立主格，一定要在心里问自己句子逻辑意思能不能符合用独立主格的条件。

superbat28

The owner and editor being two young man, the Messenger was published in XXX.  这样的话，我倒还能接受。

但E，又在young man后面加了个 ,Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph, 就让我感觉很诡异了。给人一种修饰对象转来转去，非常不清晰的感觉。

单就这道题而言，我的看法是“一定要十分明确和重视，整个句子到底哪里是重点，哪里是作者要强调的地方”==>即要考虑语义。也就是说E的话，由于主谓宾是The Messenger was published. 但其实，我觉得这道题很明显，作者的重点不是想强调它在哪出版的，所以应该以“有意义的句义”问“根本目的出发点”从而寻找能正确表达作者想要意思的句子表达，并保证没有语法错误。   这是这道题，包括看OG很多“似乎语法上都很简单的题”的一个营养所在，就是去破译、理解句子的句义，并把语法和句义结合起来考虑SC问题。

单说独立主格，我个人的感觉，是E的这个独立主格显得很没意义。比如His hands shaking, he went into the room. 像这种句子，his hands shaking尽管是独立主格，是表示“主句的伴随”，但是这个独立主格和句子主句是存在一定的逻辑关系的，也就是说“如果2者没有什么直接或潜在的关系，干嘛要用一种语法手段把他们结合在一起呢？”

但是这道题E选项，我就觉得这个并不是特别有逻辑关系的独立主格和主句。所以，我个人觉得这里用独立主格没什么意义~

wangjieava23

恩恩, 是 absolute phrase. manhattan 语法里有。

但是，我拿不准这样的phrase 里出现being 怎么理解。作为分词，形容词词性？

A mixture of poems and short fiction, Jean Toomer's Cane has been called one of the three best novels ever written by a Black American—the others being Richard Wright's Native Son and Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man

这个划线部分也应该是absolute phrase, 核心名词就是the others，being Richard.....是修饰成分。对吗？

zhongshanlh

嗯，看完了一起讨论下吧嘿嘿

先mark, 正在弄别的问题。回来再看

-- by 会员 wangjieava23 (2012/5/7 14:53:33)

wangjieava23

先mark, 正在弄别的问题。回来再看

zhongshanlh

贴一段Ron的原话
in choice (e), the initial modifier is actually incorrect, not just awkward. (it's not a very good idea for second-language speakers to try to absorb the idea of what is “awkward” and what is not; for the most part, it's impossible to develop that intuition without decades of high-level experience with the language in question.)
in particular, if you are going to use this sort of construction (which is called an “absolute phrase”, if you want to google it) as an initial modifier, it should start with a possessive. for instance:
his hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> correct
the hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> incorrect; we don't know whose hands.**

the initial modifier in choice (e) has the same problem: it starts with "the owner and editor". this is unacceptable for the same reason.
O(∩_∩)O~~~~~~~~所以E不是独立主格啊~在句首的独立主格结构必须要表明所属啊

-- by 会员 llssyy93 (2012/5/7 12:49:46)

zhongshanlh

in particular, if you are going to use this sort of construction (which is called an “absolute phrase”, if you want to google it) as an initial modifier, it should start with a possessive. for instance:
his hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> correct
the hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> incorrect; we don't know whose hands.**

-- by 会员 llssyy93 (2012/5/7 12:49:46)

受教啦受教啦~以前真不知道这个！谢谢啦

llssyy93

贴一段Ron的原话
in choice (e), the initial modifier is actually incorrect, not just awkward. (it's not a very good idea for second-language speakers to try to absorb the idea of what is “awkward” and what is not; for the most part, it's impossible to develop that intuition without decades of high-level experience with the language in question.)
in particular, if you are going to use this sort of construction (which is called an “absolute phrase”, if you want to google it) as an initial modifier, it should start with a possessive. for instance:
his hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> correct
the hands shaking with anticipation, joseph went up to the door and knocked. --> incorrect; we don't know whose hands.**

the initial modifier in choice (e) has the same problem: it starts with "the owner and editor". this is unacceptable for the same reason.
O(∩_∩)O~~~~~~~~所以E不是独立主格啊~在句首的独立主格结构必须要表明所属啊