- UID
- 1202496
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2016-4-5
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
引用Ron大神的解释,在Ron的视频里也有讲过
there are two kinds of parallel signals: ONE-PART (such as "and", "or", "but"), and TWO-PART (such as "not only ... but also", "both ... and").
when you have PARALLELISM WITH A ONE-PART SIGNAL, the only words that are "locked in" are the ones directly FOLLOWING the signal.
as long as you can find the corresponding structure in the other part, then the parallelism is fine.
examples:
i worked in nevada and florida.
i worked in nevada and in florida.
BOTH OF THESE ARE FINE.
reasons:
in the first, the part that's "locked in" by the signal and is just florida. therefore, the parallel construction would be just nevada.
since that construction is there, the sentence is parallel:
i worked in
nevada
and
florida.
in the second, the part that's "locked in" by the signal and is in florida. therefore, the parallel construction would be just in nevada.
since that construction is there, the sentence is parallel:
i worked
in nevada
and
in florida.
--
for completely analogous reasons, this sentence would be fine either with or without your second "that":
an increase that
would amount to roughly five miles per gallon
and
would represent...
an increase
that would amount to roughly five miles per gallon
and
that would represent... |
|