ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Thelonious Monk, who was a jazz pianist and composer, produced a body of work both rooted in the stride-piano tradition of Willie (The Lion) Smith and Duke Ellington, yet in many ways he stood apart from the mainstream jazz repertory.

正确答案: D

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 4912|回复: 18
打印 上一主题 下一主题

OG12 88 关于that be 从句的问题

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-5-13 23:28:31 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
88.Thelonious Monk, who was a jazz pianist and composer, produced a body of work both rooted in the stride-piano tradition of Willie (The Lion) Smith and Duke Ellington, yet in many ways he stood apart from the mainstream jazz tradition.



(A)Thelonious Monk, who was a jazz pianist and composer, produced a body of work both rooted
(B)Thelonious Monk, the jazz pianist and composer, produced a body of work that was rooted both
(C)Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk, who produced a body of work rooted



(D)Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk produced a body of work that wasrooted(这个that was怎么不省掉啊?不是有很多题都觉得n+that be是比较啰嗦的,,哦,这是不是限定性从句啊?貌似应该省掉that was,直接n+done???)PS是正解
(E)Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk produced a body of work rooted both
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2010-5-14 00:14:26 | 只看该作者
可省可不省,啰嗦这一标准应该在排除了其他更明显到语法错误后在使用,这一题其他选项有更严重得错误
板凳
发表于 2010-5-14 02:02:06 | 只看该作者
省掉应该是错的。先和e项比一下,e的both不平行,然后rooted。假设e没有both:Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk produced a body of work rooted ,
d:Jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk produced a body of work that was rooted 就差that was的话,我看还是d好因为produced 和rooted都是对J&t的,相当于两个谓语。但是这两个谓语却没有用连词连接,这是个致命错误
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2010-5-14 09:02:32 | 只看该作者
是吗?我怎么觉得这个root指的是a body of work?顺便问一句,这个that was修饰的中心词是body,还是work?
5#
发表于 2010-5-14 10:45:29 | 只看该作者
遇到名词1+介词+名词2后面加which/that的结构,只有名词2在语法形式上跟which/that以及后面的动词不符之外的情况下才修饰名词1。
举个例子,bodies of work that are...这里的that修饰bodies
                knowledge of people which is...这里的which 也修饰knowledge
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-5-14 10:51:30 | 只看该作者

3Q

你的意思是介词前面是中心词?那这个放之四海皆准吗?还是有例外,像你说的,万一后面的谓语在逻辑上可以修饰介词后面名词,那。。。怎么办?有没有这种情况啊?
7#
发表于 2010-5-14 10:54:03 | 只看该作者
错啦。我的意思是介词之后的才是修饰重点。那两个例子是仅有的反例。就是在名词2不符合后面that be修饰的语法形式时才会修饰前面的名词1
8#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-5-14 10:59:17 | 只看该作者

。。。

那我大概可以肯定你错咯~一般应该是介词前面是中心词哦
9#
发表于 2010-5-14 11:00:55 | 只看该作者
哈哈。是没错。但是现在是在考虑that修饰的是谁。不是重点问题。
10#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-5-14 11:02:26 | 只看该作者

天啊

狮子姐姐要被你说迷惑了~
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, 2024-10-5 21:02
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