GWD26-30

香香茶

For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to personify devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

A.      devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere

B.      devastation and enslavement in the name of progress by which native peoples of the Western Hemisphere have been decimated

C.      devastating and enslaving in the name of progress those native peoples of the Western Hemisphere that have been decimated

D.      devastating and enslaving those native peoples of the Western hemisphere which in the name of progress are decimated.

E.      the devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that have decimated the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

这题居然没人问，答案是A，为什么E不对？我在A中找不到that修饰的对象。

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-9 15:29:26编辑过]

gonghao

the devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that have decimated the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.

gonghao

 progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere

香香茶

多谢楼上的，我认为that从句修饰的是the devastation and enslavement而非progress,因为能够执行decimate这个动作的只能是前者，进步怎么能屠杀百姓呢？请指教！

gonghao

什么理由能解释楼上的跳跃修饰呢？

【奴役和毁坏】这两个名词能杀人吗？

在屠杀西半球的民族的过程中，赋以【奴役和毁坏】以人性/格化

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-6 15:02:59编辑过]

香香茶

既然赋以“奴役和毁坏”以人格化，那么当然可以杀人啊。

另外，in the name of progress是在进步的名义下，不是在XX过程中吧，进步怎么能杀人呢？我还是不理解。

香香茶

怎么没人来回答我的问题呢，郁闷

我认真的再看这道题，that从句到底可不可以跳跃修饰devastation and enslavement呢，我查看了很多前人关于跳跃修饰的讨论，发现跳跃修饰主要通过逻辑意思来判断。

跳跃修饰的判断：
1）从逻辑意思上判断
2）从主谓一致来判断，这点也很常用

以上是引用前人的话，并举例子如下：

21. With its plan to develop seven and a half acres of shore land, Cleveland is but one of a large number of communities on the Great Lakes that is looking to its waterfront as a way to improve the quality of urban life and attract new businesses.
(A) is looking to its waterfront as a way to improve the quality of urban life and attract
(B) is looking at its waterfront to improve the quality of urban life and attract
(C) are looking to their waterfronts to improve the quality of urban life and attract
(D) are looking to its waterfront as a way of improving the quality of urban life and attracting
(E) are looking at their waterfronts as a way they can improve the quality of urban life and attract
如何判断are looking 修饰的是什么？是communities or lakes?这个题目是根据意思来判断，因为谓语是are looking，所以主语必然是communities，lakes逻辑不通。只能是communities而不能是Great Lakes指着其waterfront提高城市生活质量。

再来看看本题，与上面的例子是不是有异曲同工之效呢？我认为E和A有个很不同的一点是多了一个the，这就很有可能决定了that分句修饰的是the后面的东东了，再说了，如我在上面的帖子所说，能够执行decimate这个动作的不可能是progress，而只能是devastation and enslavement，所以从逻辑意思上来判断that是跳跃修饰devastation and enslavement，而因为这两个名词在一起是复合名词，所以用复数。

what's more，E中的the和其它选项相比是不是更好呢？我搜索了一下用come to signify的句子，发现大多数的句子后面都用了限定词，不用的大多数都是专有名词，人名，地名等，而这里的devastation and enslavement只是一般的名词，如果用the来限定表特指会不会好一些呢？

综上所述，我仍然坚持选择E。期待NN出现，能够和我讨论，感激不尽！

zhangla

E is wrong because of the "have". "that" cannot modify "the devastation and enslavement" but can only modify "progress" so it must use "has".

A is right. "that" modifies "progress".

progress这里好象根据语气是个带贬义的词,是可以decimate的. 我的感觉.

gonghao

在大批杀害西半球的本土民族的名义下，赋予【奴役和毁坏】以人性化

意思是：【大批杀害西半球的本土民族】形象的生动的解释了progress

这里【奴役和毁坏】是personify的宾语

in the name of progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere

是一个长的要命的状语

如果您说的that从句修饰成立的

改写后就是这样：personify devastation and enslavement that have decimated the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere in the name of progress

解释是这样的：在进步的名义下，赋以『已经杀死了西半球本土民族的【奴役和毁坏】』以人性化

逻辑通吗？已经杀死了西半球本土民族的奴役和毁坏？类比一下：已经杀死了成千上万人的封建和官僚？

in the name of progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere

这里修饰progress，在怎么样一个进步的名义下，在一个已经杀死了很多西半球民族的所谓的进步的名义下

这里是有贬义的意思的

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-7 12:25:39编辑过]

司香尉

我感觉that是修饰devastation and enslavement，这是个复合名词，应该作为单数，比如OG60

According to a recent poll, owning and living in a freestanding house on its own land is still a goal of a majority of young adults, like that of earlier generations.

(A)   like that of earlier generations

(B)   as that for earlier generations

(C)   just as earlier generations did

(D)  as have earlier generations

as it was of earlier generations

我再去翻翻OG，看看有没有其他例子。

E当中的那个the，我看着很不顺眼，为什么要用特指，难道还分这种奴役和毁坏和那种奴役和毁坏？