OG241-Besides/As well as在句首的修饰对象问题

rt316

241. As well as heat and light, the Sun is the source of a continuous stream of atomic particles known as the solar wind.

(A)  As well as heat and light, the Sun is the source of a continuous stream

(B)  Besides heat and light, also the Sun is the source of a continuous stream

(C)  Besides heat and light, the Sun is also the source of a continuous streaming

(D)  The Sun is the source not only of heat and light, but also of a continuous stream

(E)  The Sun is the source of not only heat and light but, as well, of a continuous streaming

Choice D, the best answer, has no modification errors and uses parallel phrases to complete the idiomatic construction not only ... but also. Choices A, B, and C have modification errors: As well as heat and light and Besides heat and light cannot logically modify the Sun, the nearest noun, as grammar requires them to do. This misdirected modification suggests that heat and light are also (in addition to the Sun) a source of the solar wind. Choice B may be faulted for the awkward word order of also the Sun, while C unnecessarily uses streaming rather than the more straightforward stream. Choice E fails to use parallel phrases in the idiomatic construction not only x ... but [also] y: of should not appear before not only if it appears after but, and but also is preferable to but. Finally, the use of the gerund streaming rather than the more straightfor­ward noun stream is needlessly awkward.

划线部分有点不明白。
ETS说：As well as heat and light and Besides heat and light cannot logically modify the Sun, the nearest noun, as grammar requires them to do.
Besides和As well as难道和Like/Unlike类似，有主语对应的问题？照ETS的解释，Besides和As well as在这里就相当于Like，因为heat/light/Sun是同级关系。As well as的用法没有找到很多例子，但是Besides的例子好像不能支持ETS的观点。
比如：
1-Besides heat, the Sun also produces several types of radiation.
2-Besides milk and cheese, we need vegatables.
如果这两句不算错的话，照ETS的分析，1指的是Sun和heat都在produces radiation。2指的是milk/cheese/we都需要vegatables。如果对于上述的看法我们可以用所谓的逻辑性来解释的话，那么这个例子呢？
3-Besides him, we need you.
到底是‘我们需要你和他’，还是‘他和我们都需要你’。

抱歉，我这个问题可能很弱智，不过还是希望能够得到一个解释，谢谢!

青鸟

你的问题提得很好，在这里的确有一个主语对应的问题，那么其实你已经回答了问题的所在，因为abc造成了句子可能有歧义，而gmat的另一个特征就是避免歧义。如果一个有歧义的句子在商业文献或者合同中是致命的。所以，这个句子要改成没有歧义的方式, d是一个很好的句子，意思清楚，结构完美，而不会遇到你理解上的偏颇问题。

rt316

谢谢!

不过我问题的关键在于ETS对Besides用法的解释，因为这个解释我无法理解。从常规的例子中我们并没有发现Besides是修饰其就近名词的，但是为什么ETS在这道题中做了上述的强调？

麻烦再看看，谢谢了！

青鸟

以下是引用stoneren在2004-6-2 10:03:00的发言：

谢谢!

不过我问题的关键在于ETS对Besides用法的解释，因为这个解释我无法理解。从常规的例子中我们并没有发现Besides是修饰其就近名词的，但是为什么ETS在这道题中做了上述的强调？

麻烦再看看，谢谢了！

强调的原因就是因为会引起歧义。商业文章和普通的文章是不一样的，要求严谨。所以可能在平时不错的句子，在gmat事错的。这里并没有说besides事就近修饰名词的 ，而是，因为可能造成歧义，因为可能会造成两种意思。就像你说的，到底是他需要我们，还是我们需要他。我的理解是ets在这里并没有仔细地告诉你besides地用法是不是unlike, like,实际上besides和unlike,like得用法是不一样的。前者是句子歧义，后者是比较对象容易不对。但是都可以说是修饰不当。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-6-2 10:30:00编辑过]

dreadpower

     两个原则：

    1。as well as绝对不能在句首

    2。表示比较概念的介词短语如like/unlike/besides等修饰主语，介词短语后面接动词的话，也修饰主语，因为主语是这个动作的执行者

     

paopao

stoneren, 你问的问题得到解决了吗

我仍然不懂啊 如果你明白了 能讲讲吗

谢谢

LES

偶觉得从OG241来看，GMAT的语法就是要求besides连接的两个对象对等。

rt316

LES已经回答清楚了，我也是这样痛苦地接受了ETS的个人观点。

paopao

以下是引用stoneren在2004-7-11 9:17:00的发言：
LES已经回答清楚了，我也是这样痛苦地接受了ETS的个人观点。

只能这样接受

OG

141. Unlike transplants between identical twins, whose genetic endowment is the same, all patients receiving hearts or other organs must take antirejection drugs for the rest of their lives.

(A) Unlike transplants between identical twins, whose genetic endowment is the same

(B) Besides transplants involving identical twins with the same genetic endowment

(C) Unless the transplant involves identical twins ，who have the same genetic endowment

(D) Aside from a transplant between identical twins with the same genetic endowment（C）

(E) Other than transplants between identical twins, whose genetic endowment is the same

In A and B, the phrases beginning Unlike... and Besides... modify patients, the subject of the main clause; thus A absurdly states that Unlike transplants..., patients... must take... drugs, and B that all patients except for transplants... must take... drugs. （逻辑主语错：除了移植。。。病人）

rt316

paopao, you are so cool.

我一直苦于没有找到合适的证明，原来OG已经给出了解释，惭愧啊，居然一直没发现。