关于with结构的修饰问题

remona9t

最近查了很多with结构的修饰问题，也看了语法知识点关于with的讨论内容，有的nn也总结的很好，但最近做了gwd的题，发现里面出现了一种with的用法，在以前的总结中没有看到过（或者是我没有注意到），像请教一下大家：

Q29

For protection from the summer sun, the Mojave lived in open-sided, flat-topped dwellings known as shades, each a roof of poles and arrowweed supported by posts set in a rectangle.

1. each a roof of poles and arrowweed
   
   
2. each a roof of poles and arrowweed that are being
   
   
3. with each being a roof of poles and arrowweed
   
   
4. with roofs of poles and arrowweed to be
   
   
5. with roofs of poles and arrowweed that are

gwd10-24

For the last five years the Dutch economy has grown faster than Britain, France, or Germany, with the unemployment rate having remained well below that of the other three countries.

1. Britain, France, or Germany, with the unemployment rate having remained
   
   
2. have those of Britain, France, or Germany, and the unemployment rate remaining
   
   
3. have Britain, France, and Germany, and the unemployment rate has remained
   
   
4. the economy of Britain, France, and Germany, with the unemployment rate that has remained
   
5. the economies of Britain, France, and Germany, and the unemployment rate has remained

以上这两道题的结构都是：SVO, with+N. 结构，像这种介词短语在句尾，前面有逗号语主句分离，是否充当非限定性修饰成分，修饰的是否是前面紧跟的名词（如果是 a of b, 结构，则根据逻辑意思来判断修饰谁）？还是另有修饰的规则？到底应该优先修饰谁呢？

望NN予以解答！

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-29 16:02:53编辑过]

crbeijing

别太钻牛角尖。语法有规律，但运用时也很灵活。可以试试从句意判断。

remona9t

哎，可是这种题我还真是拿不准

Avantasia

with在句尾的非限定修饰实在不是一个好选择, 个人观点.

remona9t

我也觉得是，最近没有看到WITH在结尾，作为限定修饰有是正确答案的句子