小口细嚼--杀鸡4Ｄ

通吃伯

还是拘泥于形式，仿佛做事情前得先来个宣言，或登个缘起。

今早和一位Ｇ友在讨论题目的时候，她说我们很多错误相同，不如发帖让更多人参与讨论－－这便算是缘起

而转今早写的BLOG算作宣言吧。

《重复是高分的情妇》

这几日一直在做语法。。

OG做了几遍，虚假的遍数每轮都试图掩盖一个问题，我真的懂了么？

以前推崇一定强度下的作题，虽有其好处，能够增加一些耐力。

可惜当反复大量去做已作过的题目，只是让“我懂了”这个假象变得更真。

习惯了大口吞咽，并为见得吸收多少，无非是把胃撑大，以为吃多了便健康。

还是小口细嚼吧，当反反复复总是在同样的题目上发生错误的时候，反反复复体察考点，意图，乃至反反复复将其背出，融入骨髓才是正道。

马儿大声地在喊：失败是成功之母，重复是高分的情妇

可惜他高估了我的智商，他本该加句：情妇是也是要有精神的沟通，不然是妓女。

通吃伯

关于一个不简洁的结构 where there be

以下两句中 where there BE 都被看作是wordy的。。是不是。Where there就是不好的结构呢？
                另外对where从句使用还是不太会—〉地点现行词 + where + 完整句子 [不宜出现 there be句子] 这个理解对么？

59.  His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas.

(A) in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas

(B) in which great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas

(C) when great ice sheets existed
                    where there were areas now temperate

(D) when great ice sheets had existed in current temperate[w1]  areas

(E) when great ice sheets existed in areas now that are temperate

Verb form

In which or when can be used interchangeably in this sentence.[w2]  The verb form here should be the simple past existed rather than the past perfect had existed.

Now currently is redundant because both adverbs express the same idea.

A    Had existed should be existed; now currently is redundant

B     Correct. The simple past verb tense is correctly used in this sentence; now is placed and used correctly.

C    Where there were areas now temperate is wordy and confusing

D    Had existed should be existed; current should be currently, in current temperate areas is unclear

E     Now is an adverb and should be placed just after the verb are

The correct answer is B.

98.  As rainfall began to decrease in the Southwest about the middle of the twelfth century, most of the Monument Valley Anasazi abandoned their homes to join other clans whose access to water was less limited.

(A) whose access to water was less limited

(B) where there was access to water that was less limited

(C) where they had less limited water access

(D) with less limitations on water access

(E) having less limitations to water access

Diction + Logical predication

In the original sentence, the underlined clause provides a clear, correct, and succinct comparison, explaining the reason for the migration. The possessive pronoun whose correctly refers to its immediate antecedent, clans, and modifies access. For those other clans, access to water was less limited than it was for the Anasazi.

A    Correct. This sentence uses a clear, concise clause that correctly connects access to water with clans by using the possessive pronoun whose.

B     Where there was[w3]  ... that was is awkward, wordy, and redundant

C    They is ambiguous and might refer to either the Anasazi or other clans-, less limited water access is awkward

D    Limitations is a countable quantity, so it must be modified by fewer, not less

E     As a countable quantity, limitations should be modified by fewer, not less, having is ambiguous because it is unclear whether it refers to the Anasazi or other clans

The correct answer is A.

---

 [w1]adj 需要adv来修饰。

 [w2]两者此处无差别

 [w3]不好的结构

通吃伯

代词指代

102.     Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives, capitalized on her keen observation and love of the natural world.

(A) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives,

(B) In her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives, Beatrix Potter

(C) In her book illustrations, which she carefully coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix Potter

(D) Carefully coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations

(E) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinated them with her narratives and

Logical predication + Rhetorical construction

This sentence awkwardly presents two phrases intended to modify Beatrix Potter and loses the clarity and logic of the meaning. In the original sentence, these modifiers sound choppy and create too much separation between the subject, Beatrix Potter, and the verb capitalized Beginning the sentence with in her book illustrations and following that phrase with the relative clause which she carefully coordinated with her narratives allows the subject, Beatrix Potter, to be united with the verb, capitalized, for a stronger main clause.主谓之间插入过多修饰成分，使得主谓关系看来不那么紧密

A    The modifying elements are poorly placed and leave the subject too far from the verb

B     Phrase carefully coordinating ... illogically modifies the noun that immediately precedes it (book illustrations); Potter, not the illustrations, did the coordinating; awkward and unclear

C    Correct. The correct placement of the modifying elements makes this sentence easier to understand; the use of which clearly links the two elements.which she很好的让主语先次出现，然后也把修饰成分明确的组织起来。不至于让人对各修饰成分表示不解

D    Carefully coordinated ... absurdly modifies Beatrix Potter rather than her illustrations逻辑主语有错

E     Them cannot refer to book illustrations because the plural noun is the object of the preposition in; [w1] the relationships among the parts of the sentence are unclear

The correct answer is C.

Q：Ｅ选项中，我是依据其改变原意予以排除。没有触及代词指代的问题。不过看OG解释是说这点上出了问题。对于代词指代，一直有些疑惑。

记得XDF说过，代词指只能指代主干部分。

这里是不是存在如下两种大情况：

１，从句中的指代

２，作状语的指代

如果是从句中的指代，代词可以就近指代其修饰的部分，也就是说可以为介词短语中的名词；而若作为非从句的状语，那么代词只好修饰句子主干出现的名词，而不能去修饰本身也为状语短语的名词部分。

不知道这个理解对不对？ [待找详细例子请教]

 

这一题，或许说明了部分我的不解。

见ＡＣ中，A, which是修饰了句子的主干部分，名词technique, C, which就近修饰了emission这个如何区别呢？

不过这个是不是侧面印证了我上述的情况一，就是从句代词[关系代词]可以就近修饰非主干部分？

105.     Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton‑ induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

(B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission

(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,

(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton‑ induced X-ray emission,

Rhetorical construction

The original sentence successfully avoids the problems that may occur in a long sentence with multiple modifiers. The sentence opens with the modifier originally developed for detecting air pollutants. This participial phrase is immediately followed by the word technique that it modifies; technique is in turn followed by the phrase called proton-induced X-ray emission. Finally; the non‑ restrictive clause which ... destroying it is correctly placed next to emission and set off from the rest of the sentence by a pair of commas.

A    Correct. The modifiers are all correctly placed and punctuated; the meaning is clear.

B     Placement of two long modifiers at the beginning of the sentence is awkward and makes it difficult to locate the subject; se[w2] cond modifier (having...) actually modifies the first modifier

C    Called proton-induced X-ray emission [w3] should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; relative clause introduced by which incorrectly and illogically modifies emission

D    Called proton-induced X-ray emission should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; relative clause introduced by which incorrectly and illogically modifies emission; has the ability to is wordy

E     Called proton-induced X-ray emission should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; has the ability to is wordy

The correct answer is A.

 

---

 [w1]这是说them不能回指代状从部分么？

 [w2]两个长修饰连续非好结构

 [w3]修饰对象要紧密

通吃伯

107.     In his research paper, Dr. Frosh, medical director of the Payne Whitney Clinic, distinguishes mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic‑depressive psychosis.

(A) mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(B) mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(C) between mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(D) between mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(E) genuine manic-depressive psychosis and mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease

Idiom + Rhetorical construction

This sentence contrasts two problems, and it must use the correct idiomatic expression to do so clearly and effectively: Dr. Frosh distinguishes between x (mood swings) and y (psychosis). The clause that describes mood swings (which may...) should be as clear and concise as possible;
            Q:
                为什么认为此处不clear & concise? the possessive pronoun
                their[w1] 
            is awkward and should be omitted.

A    Fails to use the correct idiomatic expression; their should be omitted

B     Incorrect idiomatic expression; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

C    Correct. In this sentence, the correct idiomatic expression makes the contrast clear, and the unnecessary possessive their is omitted.

D    Idiom incorrectly formulated as distinguishes between x from y; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

E     The preposition between has been omitted from the idiom

The correct answer is C.

---

 [w1]With one’s doing 错误结构

nemo11

以下是引用通吃伯在2008-7-19 13:50:00的发言：

关于一个不简洁的结构 where there be

以下两句中 where there BE 都被看作是wordy的。。是不是。Where there就是不好的结构呢？
    另外对where从句使用还是不太会—〉地点现行词 + where + 完整句子 [不宜出现 there be句子] 这个理解对么？

59.  His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas.

(A) in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas

(B) in which great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas

(C) when great ice sheets existed
     where there were areas now temperate

(D) when great ice sheets had existed in current temperate[w1]  areas

(E) when great ice sheets existed in areas now that are temperate

Verb form

In which or when can be used interchangeably in this sentence.[w2]  The verb form here should be the simple past existed rather than the past perfect had existed.

Now currently is redundant because both adverbs express the same idea.

A    Had existed should be existed; now currently is redundant

B     Correct. The simple past verb tense is correctly used in this sentence; now is placed and used correctly.

C    Where there were areas now temperate is wordy and confusing

D    Had existed should be existed; current should be currently, in current temperate areas is unclear

E     Now is an adverb and should be placed just after the verb are

The correct answer is B.

98.  As rainfall began to decrease in the Southwest about the middle of the twelfth century, most of the Monument Valley Anasazi abandoned their homes to join other clans whose access to water was less limited.

(A) whose access to water was less limited

(B) where there was access to water that was less limited

(C) where they had less limited water access

(D) with less limitations on water access

(E) having less limitations to water access

Diction + Logical predication

In the original sentence, the underlined clause provides a clear, correct, and succinct comparison, explaining the reason for the migration. The possessive pronoun whose correctly refers to its immediate antecedent, clans, and modifies access. For those other clans, access to water was less limited than it was for the Anasazi.

A    Correct. This sentence uses a clear, concise clause that correctly connects access to water with clans by using the possessive pronoun whose.

B     Where there was[w3]  ... that was is awkward, wordy, and redundant

C    They is ambiguous and might refer to either the Anasazi or other clans-, less limited water access is awkward

D    Limitations is a countable quantity, so it must be modified by fewer, not less

E     As a countable quantity, limitations should be modified by fewer, not less, having is ambiguous because it is unclear whether it refers to the Anasazi or other clans

The correct answer is A.

---

 [w1]adj 需要adv来修饰。

 [w2]两者此处无差别

 [w3]不好的结构

这个我觉得不绝对，OG里就有道题选where  there be 对的。紫皮书第27题E

where there is still a sizable population of volves and where this predator remains the archenemy of cattle and sheep.

nemo11

以下是引用通吃伯在2008-7-19 13:51:00的发言：

代词指代

102.     Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives, capitalized on her keen observation and love of the natural world.

(A) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives,

(B) In her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narratives, Beatrix Potter

(C) In her book illustrations, which she carefully coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix Potter

(D) Carefully coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations

(E) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinated them with her narratives and

Logical predication + Rhetorical construction

This sentence awkwardly presents two phrases intended to modify Beatrix Potter and loses the clarity and logic of the meaning. In the original sentence, these modifiers sound choppy and create too much separation between the subject, Beatrix Potter, and the verb capitalized Beginning the sentence with in her book illustrations and following that phrase with the relative clause which she carefully coordinated with her narratives allows the subject, Beatrix Potter, to be united with the verb, capitalized, for a stronger main clause.主谓之间插入过多修饰成分，使得主谓关系看来不那么紧密

A    The modifying elements are poorly placed and leave the subject too far from the verb

B     Phrase carefully coordinating ... illogically modifies the noun that immediately precedes it (book illustrations); Potter, not the illustrations, did the coordinating; awkward and unclear

C    Correct. The correct placement of the modifying elements makes this sentence easier to understand; the use of which clearly links the two elements.which she很好的让主语先次出现，然后也把修饰成分明确的组织起来。不至于让人对各修饰成分表示不解

D    Carefully coordinated ... absurdly modifies Beatrix Potter rather than her illustrations逻辑主语有错

E     Them cannot refer to book illustrations because the plural noun is the object of the preposition in; [w1] the relationships among the parts of the sentence are unclear

The correct answer is C.

Q：Ｅ选项中，我是依据其改变原意予以排除。没有触及代词指代的问题。不过看OG解释是说这点上出了问题。对于代词指代，一直有些疑惑。

记得XDF说过，代词指只能指代主干部分。

这里是不是存在如下两种大情况：

１，从句中的指代

２，作状语的指代

如果是从句中的指代，代词可以就近指代其修饰的部分，也就是说可以为介词短语中的名词；而若作为非从句的状语，那么代词只好修饰句子主干出现的名词，而不能去修饰本身也为状语短语的名词部分。

不知道这个理解对不对？ [待找详细例子请教]

这一题，或许说明了部分我的不解。

见ＡＣ中，A, which是修饰了句子的主干部分，名词technique, C, which就近修饰了emission这个如何区别呢？

不过这个是不是侧面印证了我上述的情况一，就是从句代词[关系代词]可以就近修饰非主干部分？

105.     Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton‑ induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

(B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission

(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,

(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton‑ induced X-ray emission,

Rhetorical construction

The original sentence successfully avoids the problems that may occur in a long sentence with multiple modifiers. The sentence opens with the modifier originally developed for detecting air pollutants. This participial phrase is immediately followed by the word technique that it modifies; technique is in turn followed by the phrase called proton-induced X-ray emission. Finally; the non‑ restrictive clause which ... destroying it is correctly placed next to emission and set off from the rest of the sentence by a pair of commas.

A    Correct. The modifiers are all correctly placed and punctuated; the meaning is clear.

B     Placement of two long modifiers at the beginning of the sentence is awkward and makes it difficult to locate the subject; se[w2] cond modifier (having...) actually modifies the first modifier

C    Called proton-induced X-ray emission [w3] should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; relative clause introduced by which incorrectly and illogically modifies emission

D    Called proton-induced X-ray emission should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; relative clause introduced by which incorrectly and illogically modifies emission; has the ability to is wordy

E     Called proton-induced X-ray emission should be placed next to a technique and should not be set off by commas; has the ability to is wordy

The correct answer is A.

---

 [w1]这是说them不能回指代状从部分么？

 [w2]两个长修饰连续非好结构

 [w3]修饰对象要紧密

代词不能指代插入语吧。W1没找到在那儿阿？

nemo11

以下是引用通吃伯在2008-7-19 13:53:00的发言：

107.     In his research paper, Dr. Frosh, medical director of the Payne Whitney Clinic, distinguishes mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic‑depressive psychosis.

(A) mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(B) mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(C) between mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(D) between mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(E) genuine manic-depressive psychosis and mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease

Idiom + Rhetorical construction

This sentence contrasts two problems, and it must use the correct idiomatic expression to do so clearly and effectively: Dr. Frosh distinguishes between x (mood swings) and y (psychosis). The clause that describes mood swings (which may...) should be as clear and concise as possible;
   Q:
    为什么认为此处不clear & concise? the possessive pronoun
    their[w1] 
   is awkward and should be omitted.

A    Fails to use the correct idiomatic expression; their should be omitted

B     Incorrect idiomatic expression; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

C    Correct. In this sentence, the correct idiomatic expression makes the contrast clear, and the unnecessary possessive their is omitted.

D    Idiom incorrectly formulated as distinguishes between x from y; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

E     The preposition between has been omitted from the idiom

The correct answer is C.

---

 [w1]With one’s doing 错误结构

同问

nemo11

以下是引用通吃伯在2008-7-19 13:53:00的发言：

107.     In his research paper, Dr. Frosh, medical director of the Payne Whitney Clinic, distinguishes mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic‑depressive psychosis.

(A) mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(B) mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(C) between mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(D) between mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(E) genuine manic-depressive psychosis and mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease

Idiom + Rhetorical construction

This sentence contrasts two problems, and it must use the correct idiomatic expression to do so clearly and effectively: Dr. Frosh distinguishes between x (mood swings) and y (psychosis). The clause that describes mood swings (which may...) should be as clear and concise as possible;
   Q:
    为什么认为此处不clear & concise? the possessive pronoun
    their[w1] 
   is awkward and should be omitted.

A    Fails to use the correct idiomatic expression; their should be omitted

B     Incorrect idiomatic expression; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

C    Correct. In this sentence, the correct idiomatic expression makes the contrast clear, and the unnecessary possessive their is omitted.

D    Idiom incorrectly formulated as distinguishes between x from y; the phrase perhaps violent ... is awkward and unclear

E     The preposition between has been omitted from the idiom

The correct answer is C.

---

 [w1]With one’s doing 错误结构

 punctuation makes clear this separate action cannot be the case;  同问，这句话怎么理解？？？

nemo11

OG11-105. Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,

为什么OG说A,which refers to a technique; C, which refers to emission