请教GWD1-41

nyc_cfa

我认为是E, 尽管E的时态是有点别扭。

关键是as early as是用来修饰established,  B中做不到这点，只能修饰was.

丑得老婆哭

感叹一下：看讨论太花时间了!!!!!

E：had been毫无根据，这种提炼方法没说只是以前用现在就不用了。对于E这种句子，缩减得形式是：SVO,done.即：leaching had been a method,well established.过去分词放在句末，有两种用法，1是修饰主句主语作状语2是修饰主句宾语作定语。因此，这里得过去分词用法是1种情况都说得通。判定E错不是因为后面这个established，而是时态得错！

C:正确。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-9-3 10:31:05编辑过]

rosebudxiaojie

以下是引用wwwhahchn在2005-5-14 14:06:00的发言：

OG011：

Using accounts of various ancient writers they used, scholars have painted a sketchy picture of the activities of an all-female cult that, perhaps as early as the sixth century B.C., worshipped a goddess known in Latin as Bona Dea, "the good goddess."

这里的perhaps as early as the sixth century B.C.，从语法上我分不清是修饰名词cult还是动词worshipped，不过我觉得从逻辑上来说，修饰cult更合适

这里as early as the sixth century 做状语修饰定语从句中的分词worshipped

pebbles

以下是引用薰衣紫草在2004-12-3 5:48:00的发言：

C

E is wrong. In E, "well established" refers to mineral extraction rather than to "leaching", distorting the orginal meaning of the sentence.

So is D. The orginal meaning is leaching was as early as.....

B is obviously wrong! read it again. The first half of the sentence doesn't even have a vt. because "established" here should be passive --- was established.

语法服了紫草了...读来已有OG解释风范了.可惜自己又上ETS当了,竟然弃C选E.晕!

dreamerps

C,紫草厉害啊~~

chenshw

这几个as early as ...和原文中的as early as一样，都是副词短语修饰整个句子的，leaching早在十八世纪就是a well-established method of mineral extraction, 该短语并不修饰某一词，leaching、method 或者extraction。

mygrace

vote for C

nirvana0211

为什么紫草认为In E, "well established" refers to mineral extraction rather than to "leaching"？　现在分词可以修饰主句主语，过去分词就不可以么？

brissa

1，  我不认为薰衣紫草mm说的是对的。

E中well established as early as 18th century,是用逗号括起来的插入语，或者说是状语，状语是修饰主句谓语的，即had been，不是宾语a method of mineral extraction.另外我们在讨论带逗号的过分修饰问题时，也谈到过它有两个作用：1，修饰先行此，2，跳跃修饰主句谓语。总之，这里well established as early as 18th century是没有修饰歧异的。

我选E

2，关于过分时态问题：原题中明明给出了时间状语but until 25 years ago miners did not realize...., 因此，从句用过去式，主句是过去的过去，当然是过去分词了

3，讨论一下CD中的method of mineral extraction还是method of extracting mineral，即到底用动名词还是名词。我认为动名词好，因为它表达动态过程，而leaching也是一个动态的过程。（如果主语是leach，这里用extraction就比较好了）

4，well-established 的位置问题：在CD中的位置都是错的。原句well established明明是做状语，CD中给改成定语，改变句意，错。

5，as early as18 century问题。原句是放在两个逗号中给括起来的，做状语的，C还勉强可以说是仍旧做状语，但D中给放到that was定从中去了，明显成为a method of...的定语，改变句意，错。

综上所述，我认为E,

虽然a method of mineral extraction不如 a method of extracting mineral好，但瑕不掩瑜。E

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-1-26 0:31:33编辑过]

Grigo

以下是引用bryan0806在2004-9-27 5:29:00的发言：

不,我觉得 leaching 现在是不是a method of mineral extraction 并不知道 文中只说一直到25年前miners才了解病毒在过程中是主动的角色

如果文中要强调leaching 现在不是a method of mineral extraction  则需用过去完成时  但我觉得应该没有这样

up.

C