OG237修饰问题请教

薰衣紫草

http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=23&replyid=48928&id=48928&page=1&skin=0&Star=3

请看第24楼以下.

wwwhahchn

关于C和E，现在分词短语究竟是restrictive还是nonrestrictive，我问了ETS，并结合了86版OG的第15题，得到的答案是“participial phrases not preceded by a comma are always restrictive”。

去信我忘了保存，大概意思就是从237题对C的解释可推出E的现在分词短语是nonrestrictive，这和86版OG15题对B的解释有矛盾。以下是回复：

Thank you for your message concerning Sentence Correction questions in the
1986 edition and the 10th edition of The Official Guide for GMAT Review. You
indicated that you were confused because the explanations for two of the
questions appeared to be contradictory.

The two questions to which you refer do both include participial phrases,
and participial phrases not preceded by a comma are always restrictive. In
choice B of question 15 in the 1986 edition, the phrase "...the African land
symbolizing the possibility of freedom..." is illogically restrictive,
implying that only one of many African lands symbolized freedom to Garvey.
The correct choice, A, more logically refers to "Africa, the land that, to
him, symbolized the possibility of freedom."

In question 237 in the 10th edition, the use of the phrase "are because of"
is what ultimately makes choice C incorrect, as described in the
explanation. The distinction between choice C and the correct choice, E, is
not a distinction between types of modifiers, however; both C and E contain
restrictive modifiers.

We appreciate your having taken the time to let us know about your concern.
Inquiries such as yours help us to maintain and improve the quality of the
GMAT.

按ETS说的，那岂不是C和E都有错？？要不然就是对C限定性定从的解释根本不对？？

个人感觉，限定性和非限定性这一条不太好用

丑得老婆哭

注意限定性定语从句与非限定性定语从句的区别,即整体和部分的区别t154,t176, t237, t234，t237, t258, 介词短语相当于限定性定语从句 t141.

A. 限定性修饰, 起限制约束作用:

1.由that 引导的定语从句, (that只引导限定性定语从句, 前面不会有逗号)

2.由前面没有逗号的一wh开头的词(who, which...)引导的定语从句,

3.with引导的短语

构成的修饰就是限定性的修饰, 起限制的作用. 就象t1里的that定语从句. 什么样的divorce呢? 是发生在when they were children时候的divorce, 而不是所有的divorce. 即限定

B. 非限制性修饰:

1. 由前面有逗号的一wh开头的词(who, which...)引导的定语从句

2. 由分词短语

构成的修饰就是非限制性修饰, 起解释, 说明的作用. 就象t1里的divorce, 如果用分词修饰就变成 divorce 的定义(definition) 是 occuring when a child, 即解释, 说明.

1. He asks the girls who is in red clothes to form a team.
2. He asks the girls with red clothes to form a team.
3. He asks the girls, who is in red, to form a team.
4. He asks the girls, dressing in red clothes, to form a team.

1,2句是限定的，可以想象成体育馆中有一大群女孩儿，有穿红的，穿绿的，有黄的等等，这群女孩子中穿红的那一部分组成一个队。此时这个穿红的修辞成份是对女孩子的群体起限定作用，是局部概念。

3，4句是非限定的，可以想象成体育馆中有一大群女孩子，所有的女孩子一个不落地组成一个队，这些女孩子共有一个特点，全都是穿红的。此时穿红的修辞成份是对女孩子的   群体不作限定，只表示这一个群体的特点。

不加逗号的定语从句是限定的，加逗号的定语从句是非限定的。
With限定，-ing或-ed分词不限定。

sammaijgd

楼上总结很好,说的很清楚,无奈的是ETS在限定和非限定上始终没有明确说法,导致大家都很迷惑,具体体现在题目和解释,如果早就象你解释的这么清楚,恐怕大家也没有那么多疑问了.

quiny

3x

eyda_c

以下是引用wwwhahchn在2005-7-20 8:30:00的发言：

关于C和E，现在分词短语究竟是restrictive还是nonrestrictive，我问了ETS，并结合了86版OG的第15题，得到的答案是“participial phrases not preceded by a comma are always restrictive”。

I think, so far, regardless of OG237, participial phrases should play a restrictive role without preceded by a comma.

On the hand, if there is "," , non-restrictive role then.

Really thanks for this useful input!

huangyh03

up