Season 2——manhattan 25（ on the Tarcoles River ）

balapupu

25. Many daring vacationers who participate in guided boat tours on the Tarcoles River encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out from the surface of the murky water.
       A       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out—》whose 有指代 vacationer 的歧义。
       B       encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out—》whose 有指代 vacationer 的歧义。
       C       had encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out—》whose 有指代 vacationer 的歧义。Had 时态错。
       D      encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses peeking out—>R with doing 表伴随。
       E       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses that are peeking out—>that are 冗余。

看答案还能指代 shallow呢？？明显逻辑意思不符啊。代词不是优先指代句子的主语？

maxiv

25. Many daring vacationers who participatein guided boat tours on the Tarcoles River
   encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out
from the surface of the murky water.
       A       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out
       对
       B       encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out
       participate是现在时，encountered过去时态错。
       C       had encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out
       无比较时态，had错。
       D      encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses peeking out
       with错，peek out变成了主语vacationers的动作
       E       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses that are peeking out
       with错，peek out变成了主语vacationers的动作

南瓜0729

25. Many daring vacationers who participatein guided boat tours on the Tarcoles River encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out from the surface of the murky water.
       A       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out  
       B       encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out
       C       had encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out    
       D      encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses peeking out      
       E       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses that are peeking out    根据时态排除BC
D？？

maxiv

25. Many daring vacationers who participate in guided boat tours on the Tarcoles River encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out from the surface of the murky water.
       A       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out
whose与鳄鱼中间隔着shallows
are很搞笑，好像鳄鱼的鼻子现在（写文章时）还在水面上

       B       encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out
encountered与participate时态不一致。肯定是participate在前吧

       C       had encountered native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses peek out
had在谁前面？

       D      encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses peeking out
对。不过with修饰谁呢，最近的noun吗，还是main clause的subj呀

       E       encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, with eyes and noses that are peeking out
有that后，eyes and noses没有verb了

jamesch

D选项的with引导独立主格没问题，但是eyes and noses 到底是游客的还是鳄鱼的似乎没有指明，略有歧义！

jamesch

反观A选项，encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out  （noun modifier）修饰最近noun无争议，但也有例外，如sth of sth ，+ noun modifier 通常修饰前一个sth。因为sth of sth 被看做一个整体，of后面为修饰语，所以中心词应该为前一个sth。而本题中的crocodiles lurking in the shallows似乎也应符合这个原则。望解答！

babybearmm

Good question!

为什么"comma+whose ...." 中间的whose必须修饰comma前面的那个名词？以下是Ron说过的：
the "touch rule" does not apply to all nounmodifiers. in general, it applies to the following noun modifiers:
______, which...
______, who/whom/whose...
also these with prepositions in front (______, to which...; ______, eachof whom...; etc.)
NO COMMA + ___ING
COMMA + APPOSITIVE, when the appositive is NOT an abstract noun (see here forthe treatment of abstract noun appositives: post35386.html#p35386)

你举的例子，我来贴Manhattan SC的原话，p234.
这里说，touch rule例外的第一种情况，也就是你想说的情况，叫做——
1) A "mission-critical" modifier falls between.
......
Other examples include parts of a whole.
Right: An ice sheet covers 80 percent OF THE SURFACE OF GREENLAND, an area roughly the size of Alaska.
The modifier an area roughly the size of Alaska modifies not the noun Greenland, but rather the whole phrase 80 percent of the surface of Greenland The "mission-critical" modifier of the surface of Greenland is required next to 80 percent in order to define that percentage.
你看它的解释，最后一句话解释了什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier。
我来通俗说，假如咱去掉这部分"of the surface of Greenland"，
那么就只剩下"An ice sheet covers 80 percent, an area ...."  这句话不make sense。
因为"80 percent"什么都不是！我们必须要用"of ... of ...."来定义(define)清楚这是个什么东西。
所以说，我们不能去掉那部分"of...of..."——这就叫做"mission-critical" modifier

那么回到原题，如果我们去掉"lurking in the shallows"，句子就是 "..... encounter native crocodiles, ...."
这个就很make sense。
那么就说修饰成分"lurking in the shallows"不是那么要紧，就算去掉也没啥大不了的。换句话说，这就不算"mission-critical" modifier.
于是，这里不属于touch rule的例外情况，还是应该遵从touch rule。
而Ron专门也提到过", whose..."绝对遵从touch rule.

至于你说 ", with ..." 可以理解为修饰vacationers，我觉得，从逻辑上不make sense。歧义与否，是看能否产生>1种“符合语法、逻辑、common sense”的理解
斑竹的主贴里面也引用过另一个道类似的题目，那个 ", with..."也是修饰monkeys，而不是修饰全句主语visitors.

说起来，这题", with ..."算是典型的absolute phrase结构，跟咱先前讨论的那道题你问的修饰对象异曲同工。结论都是：修饰什么，由句意逻辑来决定。当时我引了Ron的链接，还造了下面2个句子：
Scientists found that plants undergo photosynthesis, a process taken place in chloroplasts within the cells.
Scientists found that plants undergo photosynthesis, a finding fundamental to biological sciences.

总结如下:
类似于 ", with ..."  这种absolute phrase结构，和主句逻辑相关即可，修饰对象取决于逻辑意思，不局限于就近修饰或者非要修饰主句主语。
类似 ", whose ..."  这种，必须遵从touch rule，修饰逗号前面的名词
而 ", v-ing ..." 是要求跟主句share同一个逻辑主语，还有时态、句意的要求

希望说明白了...欢迎讨论

反观A选项，encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out  （noun modifier）修饰最近noun无争议，但也有例外，如sth of sth ，+ noun modifier 通常修饰前一个sth。因为sth of sth 被看做一个整体，of后面为修饰语，所以中心词应该为前一个sth。而本题中的crocodiles lurking in the shallows似乎也应符合这个原则。望解答！

-- by 会员 jamesch (2012/1/30 23:23:02)

jamesch

Good question!

为什么"comma+whose ...." 中间的whose必须修饰comma前面的那个名词？以下是Ron说过的：
the "touch rule" does not apply to all nounmodifiers. in general, it applies to the following noun modifiers:
______, which...
______, who/whom/whose...
also these with prepositions in front (______, to which...; ______, eachof whom...; etc.)
NO COMMA + ___ING
COMMA + APPOSITIVE, when the appositive is NOT an abstract noun (see here forthe treatment of abstract noun appositives: post35386.html#p35386)

你举的例子，我来贴Manhattan SC的原话，p234.
这里说，touch rule例外的第一种情况，也就是你想说的情况，叫做——
1) A "mission-critical" modifier falls between.
......
Other examples include parts of a whole.
Right: An ice sheet covers 80 percent OF THE SURFACE OF GREENLAND, an area roughly the size of Alaska.
The modifier an area roughly the size of Alaska modifies not the noun Greenland, but rather the whole phrase 80 percent of the surface of Greenland The "mission-critical" modifier of the surface of Greenland is required next to 80 percent in order to define that percentage.
你看它的解释，最后一句话解释了什么叫做"mission-critical" modifier。
我来通俗说，假如咱去掉这部分"of the surface of Greenland"，
那么就只剩下"An ice sheet covers 80 percent, an area ...."  这句话不make sense。
因为"80 percent"什么都不是！我们必须要用"of ... of ...."来定义(define)清楚这是个什么东西。
所以说，我们不能去掉那部分"of...of..."——这就叫做"mission-critical" modifier

那么回到原题，如果我们去掉"lurking in the shallows"，句子就是 "..... encounter native crocodiles, ...."
这个就很make sense。
那么就说修饰成分"lurking in the shallows"不是那么要紧，就算去掉也没啥大不了的。换句话说，这就不算"mission-critical" modifier.
于是，这里不属于touch rule的例外情况，还是应该遵从touch rule。
而Ron专门也提到过", whose..."绝对遵从touch rule.

至于你说 ", with ..." 可以理解为修饰vacationers，我觉得，从逻辑上不make sense。歧义与否，是看能否产生>1种“符合语法、逻辑、common sense”的理解
斑竹的主贴里面也引用过另一个道类似的题目，那个 ", with..."也是修饰monkeys，而不是修饰全句主语visitors.

说起来，这题", with ..."算是典型的absolute phrase结构，跟咱先前讨论的那道题你问的修饰对象异曲同工。结论都是：修饰什么，由句意逻辑来决定。当时我引了Ron的链接，还造了下面2个句子：
Scientists found that plants undergo photosynthesis, a process taken place in chloroplasts within the cells.
Scientists found that plants undergo photosynthesis, a finding fundamental to biological sciences.

总结如下:
类似于 ", with ..."  这种absolute phrase结构，和主句逻辑相关即可，修饰对象取决于逻辑意思，不局限于就近修饰或者非要修饰主句主语。
类似 ", whose ..."  这种，必须遵从touch rule，修饰逗号前面的名词
而 ", v-ing ..." 是要求跟主句share同一个逻辑主语，还有时态、句意的要求

希望说明白了...欢迎讨论

反观A选项，encounter native crocodiles lurking in the shallows, whose eyes and noses are peeking out  （noun modifier）修饰最近noun无争议，但也有例外，如sth of sth ，+ noun modifier 通常修饰前一个sth。因为sth of sth 被看做一个整体，of后面为修饰语，所以中心词应该为前一个sth。而本题中的crocodiles lurking in the shallows似乎也应符合这个原则。望解答！

-- by 会员 jamesch (2012/1/30 23:23:02)

-- by 会员 babybearmm (2012/1/31 14:05:06)

wow! I am impressed! 3X a lot~
也就是说类似于本题的非限定性修饰就算是遇到which也必须遵循touch rule.I think I understand this point now ,You are so great MM !

guipxian

定语从句的用法排除ABC，E又过于wordy，所以选D。

AMBER513

因为participate所以排除BC
A whose用错了
E 独立主格的名词后面不应该加that 从句