请教一道JJ (真题)

ohayo

In Hungary, as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of which are in middle management and light industry.



A as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of which are in
B as with much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women works, many in
C as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of them in
D     like much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women works, and many are
E like much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women works, and many are



应该选哪个啊,看着都不太顺的说.

jnlvo

我选C

海海

A is the key.



In X, as in Y     is the idiomatic form. So we can eliminate     B, D and E.


In C, many of them in... has no verb, creating a dangling    sentence part.


Only A uses the correct attributive clause, many of which.... which is idiomatic and makes a complete sentence.        

jnlvo

我的理由：1. an     proportion of +n.+谓语，谓语好像根前面的名词一致。


2. many of them in...标准的独立主格。


3. as后跟介词短语，此时as作副词，整个相当于插入语跟前面作比较，应该可以。like是介词通常跟名词。


A, which错，应指人             B, with很难说得通，时态可能也错了，many单独用有指代不清的嫌疑         DE，like比较对象不一致，同时插入会产生歧义，many错，加and改变原句的主从关系。


不知说得对不对，望大家指正。


    

jnlvo

改正：B错，主谓可能不一致。

海海

I agree. C could be a better answwer. But    you need to    prove that 'which' can not refer to people in the attributive clause.



Besides, what do you mean by    ' an     proportion of +n.+谓语，谓语好像根前面的名词一致。'? Do you mean the sentence shall run like this?


An proportion of ...... works.


But how can an proportion, but not women, works?

jnlvo

谓语好像根前面的名词一致。我这里前面名词n.是指women，可数的复数名词，如果这里是不可数，那肯定用单数。


补充一下：这里as做连词理解也许更好，不过这跟做题没有直接关系。

tianwan

海海: jnlvo的解释是正确的，如果你还要问“But    you need to    prove that 'which' can not refer to people in the attributive clause.”，建议你查一下语法书查一下关系从句，定语从句，关系代词的用法，很有好处。

另外，A即使改为whom,也应改为…an overwhelming proportion of women ,many of whom are in middle management and light industry, work.看起来不如C简洁明了。和限制性定语从句不同，非限制性定语从句是不可以分隔修饰的，必须紧跟在修饰对象后面。（我没有找到反例，所以得出这个结论，而且分隔修饰的几种情况都不适合非限制定语从句。哪位能找到反例？）fficeffice" />

wangdaya

c 好， jnlvo 说的不错。

对 as 的用法，这里用的不太熟悉。

JerryGuan

1、much of 如何解释？

2、“和限制性定语从句不同，非限制性定语从句是不可以分隔修饰的，必须紧跟在修饰对象后面。”是不是说反了，非限制性才可以用逗号分隔sth, which ...，限制性则一定要紧跟其后，如：sth that ...