ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 15786|回复: 28
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求教新PrepII—196

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2009-11-2 23:11:28 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
196. Leaching, the recovery of copper from the drainage water of mines, as a method of the extraction of minerals, it was well established as early as the eighteenth century, but until about 25 years ago miners did not realize that bacteria take an active part in the process.  



A. as a method of the extraction of minerals, it was well established

B. as a method of the extraction of minerals well established

C. was a well-established method of mineral extraction

D. was a well-established method of extracting mineral that was
E. had been a method of mineral extraction, well established

C is correct.
我选的是E,在看到E之前我觉得C的表达很清晰很简洁,但是有比较之后我觉得E更好一些。
首先我觉得early这个短语修饰的是establish还是extraction并没有一定,而原句是修饰establish的。
其次整个主句发生的时间都在but从句之后,but从句用得是一般过去时,E用过去完成时在时间概念上的表达不是更清晰么?

期待各位的指教
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2009-11-2 23:52:53 | 只看该作者
我觉得E的“a method of mineral extraction”表达有点拖沓
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-3 00:04:25 | 只看该作者
我觉得E的“a method of mineral extraction”表达有点拖沓
-- by 会员 dabianfu (2009/11/2 23:52:53)


可是C的表达同样是a method of mineral extraction, 只不过把修饰短语后置了而已。
地板
发表于 2009-11-3 01:09:37 | 只看该作者
E 时态错误,逻辑意思产生歧义 well established 离修饰对象太远
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2009-11-3 01:32:23 | 只看该作者
E 时态错误,逻辑意思产生歧义 well established 离修饰对象太远
-- by 会员 dy4ever (2009/11/3 1:09:37)


谢谢解答,修饰词离对象太远我觉得是不错的解释。
至于逻辑意思我觉得这个很难断定,毕竟从这句话来看early到底是修饰extraction还是establish对整句话的影响是不大的,何况原句修饰的反而是establish.
6#
发表于 2009-11-3 01:48:11 | 只看该作者
又学到了
7#
发表于 2011-5-13 13:28:46 | 只看该作者
还是不是很明白为什么不选E,除了时态的问题,E选项把well established放在后面究竟有什么问题呢?
prep语法笔记上说:well established做非限定性修饰method逻辑含义错误,应该用限定性修饰来说明所提的method是早在18世纪就建立的那个,即去掉逗号。
这是什么意思呢?请各位帮忙解释一下,谢谢了!
8#
发表于 2011-5-31 21:46:10 | 只看该作者
还是不是很明白为什么不选E,除了时态的问题,E选项把well established放在后面究竟有什么问题呢?
prep语法笔记上说:well established做非限定性修饰method逻辑含义错误,应该用限定性修饰来说明所提的method是早在18世纪就建立的那个,即去掉逗号。
这是什么意思呢?请各位帮忙解释一下,谢谢了!
-- by 会员 坤kun (2011/5/13 13:28:46)




顶一下,对于过去分词的修饰一样不是很清楚。。。之前看过which的修饰,

首先,E中,well established, 真的不可以跳跃修饰中心词method吗?很困惑。。

其实,即使理解为修饰method,是不是还是错,因为不应该用非限制修饰?可是如何判断应该是限制性修饰还是非限制性修饰?这里我一直没有懂。
9#
发表于 2011-6-1 20:03:58 | 只看该作者
up
10#
发表于 2011-6-2 21:18:06 | 只看该作者
又比如下面这个题,我不理解对选项D的说明:
“用非限定性定语从句修饰,改变原句含义”, 怎么理解?

178. (GWD-1-Q21)
That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during the excavating of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.
A.    That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during the excavating
B.    Twenty-one ceramic dog figurines discovered at the excavation
C.    Discovering twenty-one ceramic dog figurines at the excavating
D.    Ceramic dog figurines, twenty-one of which were discovered during excavating (E)    
E.    The discovery of twenty-one ceramic dog figurines during the excavation
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-9-27 15:22
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部