prep1-3 句子结构

Mayanist

以下是引用AlienX在2009-2-12 3:07:00的发言：
hehe
not really...
will you say, "I have 10 less apples than John has"? or will you say, "I have 10 fewer apples than John has"?

Let's look at more reputable examples (I know I am not that reputable ;-)):
P1#165. Researchers have determined that, because of poaching and increased cultivation in their native habitats, there are fewer than 100 Arabian leopards left in the wild, and that these leopards  are thus many times more rare than China's giant pandas.
P2#185. When drive-ins were at the height of their popularity in the late 1950s, some 4,000 existed in the United States, but today there are fewer than one-quarter as many.

说明一下，我上面的帖子没有说可以用 10 less apples，相反，我是说按照10 or less items的用法，可以用 10 or fewer apples，或者10 or less apples. 同时这种用法与在两物之间的比较不同。不过看了http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/richardwinskill/entry/10_items_or/ ，说现在鬼子也怀疑10 or less items了，将它改为 up to 10 items.   

你后面的两个例子确实好，说明10 or less apples 肯定不好。谢谢！

特别是和下面的转贴放在一起看就很清晰了http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/richardwinskill/entry/10_items_or/ 

Would you say Reading is fewer than 100 miles from London?

No, because miles are an amount and thus use “less”. You could describe the distance as 160.9 km, 176,000 yards, 1.7×10^-11 lightyears, 94,567.2 smoots, 1.6×10¹⁵ Angstroms, or any unit of distance you like because you are describing an amount using arbitrary units. However there are no other ways to describe 10 items other than “10 items”, since the items are indivisible.

Since “10 items” is a number, but “100 miles” is an amount, you have fewer items and less miles.

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-13 5:28:48编辑过]

Mayanist

大全164--fewer和less的修饰

以下是引用笨笨可可在2008-7-2 3:57:00的发言：

164.        Because natural gas is composed mostly of methane, a simple hydrocarbon, vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel.

(A) less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel

(B) fewer of certain pollutants than burning gasoline or diesel fuel do

(C) less of certain pollutants than gasoline or diesel fuel

(D) fewer of certain pollutants than does burning gasoline or diesel fuel（E）

(E) less of certain pollutants than those burning gasoline or diesel fuel

首先我对于D和E的看法是这样的。。D fewer修饰的是可数名词pullutants，than后面补足了助动词does，但是缺陷就是than后面不对称了。

E的看法是less of我认为修饰不可数名词，than后面对称，但是我认为最好补充出do。。

所以这都有问题，那不存在正确答案。。

open to dicusss.

觉得相关，所以也转贴过来：

http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=23&id=332349&star=4#332349

这一题体现逻辑至上！ Vehicles  emit  less  x  than  those (vehicles do) x， 唯一满足这个逻辑对等关系的是E，更具体一点是：Vehicles powered by NG emit less than those burning GD （do）
    

我将less of certain pollutants 理解为 less amount of certain pollutants, certain某些（种类），不然就会写成fewer certain pollutants，因为longman dictionary of comtemporay english 就有这个例子：Although low-sulfur coal produces fewer pollutants, it's more expensive to mine.

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-13 13:58:17编辑过]

lcy19812000

以下是引用songlovegt在2009-2-12 3:57:00的发言：
感觉有 in 和没有 in 还是很值得研究的。
比如
She graduated last year.
She graduated in last year.

ZT:

 i'd likewise prefer a wording such as 'in
        less
        than
        35
        years
        after...', because, in my opinion, it better conveys the idea that the migrations took place continuously over the
        35-year period. just plain 'less
        than' seemed to me, and possibly to you as well, to suggest that the migrations might have occurred all at once.

in any case, though, you've got to remember that correctness trumps clarity (and definitely trumps concision as well). therefore, differences in wording, such as this one, are trifling in comparison to actual errors in usage, grammar, diction, or idiom. i think both of us will agree that there is no idiom error in the wording chosen here; it's just a somewhat awkward wording (a situation by no means uncommon on the real test).

alohabrian

我总感觉似乎ETS想告诉我们，用less还是fewer,用many还是much和 它所修饰的名词的 冠词，单复数形式无关。这只是本人猜测。

songlovegt

引用
lcy19812000
in any case, though, you've got to remember that correctness trumps
clarity (and definitely trumps concision as well). therefore,
differences in wording, such as this one, are trifling in comparison to
actual errors in usage, grammar, diction, or idiom. i think both of us will agree that there is no idiom error in the wording chosen here; it's just a somewhat awkward wording (a situation by no means uncommon on the real test).


totally agree.
Thank

lovebbshin

关于songlovegt对有in无in的解释正确吗？

lovebbshin

关于songlovegt对有in无in的解释正确吗？

smartsky11

是

xiaoniuren

up

vivian0331

 我想问个问题：我们不经常强调逻辑主语一致么？这道题的主语是their descendants，那么前面跟它对应的应该是African honeybees，选项Ａ的主语是the release of African honeybees.这个怎么解释？

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-7-4 1:08:40编辑过]