[求助版主！][大家讨论]prep1-150，并盼版主详解！

aeoluseros

umm..part of a deal making...这里的making是定语成分,而不是做状语成分...
是整个独立主格在修饰主句，而不是仅仅making在修饰...

to lcy: 我同意a part of a deal能指代的..即做概括性同位语

lcy19812000

收到，谢谢上面两位。我同意你们的意见，特别是p1－164很能说明问题。
斑斑，论坛改版后是不是字体太大了点？一页都看不了多少内容了。呵呵。

lcy19812000

C里面的part of a deal making逻辑上不是独立主格，因为独立主格可以视作状语，表示伴随原因、条件、状态等(不伴随结果)，而这里的part of a deal making 没有这些功能不能做独立主格，所以part of a deal只能做概括前句的同位语，而根据概括性同位语的格式，概括性名词后面要用小品词that引导。

我：异议：独立主格是doing又加上了自己的主语，doing可以做伴随状语也可以做结果状语，所以独立主格应该不单单只能表示伴随吧？！
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
我的理解：

1、从结构上来说：既可以说它是独立主格，也可以说它是概括性同位语：因为它们都符合“，n. + doing”的构造形式。（概括性同位语的结构是n. +that/doing/done，不是单单只能加that。下面给出例子P1－191，正确答案为B。）

191.    (32312-!-item-!-188;#058&006469)

The loan company announced it would soon lend money to borrowers with proven records of their not paying back their loans on time, collectively known as the subprime lending market.
A. of their not paying back their loans on time,
B. of not paying back their loans on time, a group
C. of not paying back their loans on time, with such a group
D. that they do not pay back their loans on time,E. that they do not pay back their loans on time, such a group

2、从逻辑上来说：它不是独立主格，而是概括性同位语。独立主格更倾向于作状语，而这里part of a deal显然是同位语的功能。

aeoluseros

嗯，感谢lcy的求证，那点其实本来也觉得疑惑，为什么一定要用小品词，只要可以合理修饰就好，只是没想到恰当例子来反驳之...
umm...独立主格和概括性同位语应该从逻辑来区分..就如ing结构，到底是gerund还是present participle一样.
看来就是making的错误了.
ps:字大真是不习惯...回复栏又小

piggyuu

quote]
我的理解：

1、从结构上来说：既可以说它是独立主格，也可以说它是概括性同位语：因为它们都符合“，n. + doing”的构造形式。（概括性同位语的结构是n. +that/doing/done，不是单单只能加that。下面给出例子P1－191，正确答案为B。）
191.    (32312-!-item-!-188;#058&006469)
The loan company announced it would soon lend money to borrowers with proven records of their not paying back their loans on time, collectively known as the subprime lending market.
A. of their not paying back their loans on time,
B. of not paying back their loans on time, a group
C. of not paying back their loans on time, with such a group
D. that they do not pay back their loans on time,E. that they do not pay back their loans on time, such a group

2、从逻辑上来说：它不是独立主格，而是概括性同位语。独立主格更倾向于作状语，而这里part of a deal显然是同位语的功能。

-- by 会员 lcy19812000 (2009/11/1 17:15:34)

[/quote]

赞！
我昨天自己专门总结了一下同位语，水平有限只考虑了结构，没有考虑逻辑意思。不过感觉结构就够用了。（您可以参考下，但由于我思维混乱，您也可以无视之。。）

同位语可算作一种特殊的独立主格。其形式为：
1.单独同位语
2.同位语+定语成分：
   a.同位语+doing/done    
   b.同位语+that

如prep1-35
In laboratory rats, a low dose of aspirin usually suffices to block production of thromboxane,a substance that promotes blood clotting, but does not seriously interferepromotes blood clotting, but does not seriously interfere with the production of prostacyclin, which prevents clotting.
notes解释：正确, a substance that…独立主格结构作为thromboxane的同位语对thromboxane进行解释说明; but does跳过同位语和suffices并列共同作为a low dose of aspirin的谓语动词

注：
1.同位语前面的with一定不要，这点如同each独立主格结构。且each独立主格结构有时也可看做同位语结构。
2.当题目涉及这个同位语的定语成分doing和that二者pk时的一种解法：
看 同位语+定语成分发生的动作 是否与 （同位语所指的）原主人+谓语动词发生的动作为同一时间。当时间不一致则用that, 否则二者没区别。

aeoluseros

防止误导，已删……

aeoluseros

防止误导，已删……

lcy19812000

斑斑，我没说概括性同位语“从句”不需要用that来引导。
我的意思是概括性同位语不一定都是“从句”，概括性同位语还可能是“，n. + doing/done”这样的中心词加分词的形式，它不是从句。

P1－191中，a group是borrowers的同位语，a group known as是“，n. + done”的概括性同位语形式，但不是同位语从句。

aeoluseros

umm...感觉a group不是概括性同位语..而是指代了borrowers...

lcy19812000

umm...感觉a group不是概括性同位语..而是指代了borrowers...

-- by 会员 aeoluseros (2009/11/2 23:23:10)

那什么才叫概括性同位语呢？