还是prep的问题。。。谢谢~~

布布布布布丁

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.
A. that included
B. which includes
C. including
D. some of which were
E. among them being

选项分析：
A． 引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。
B． 根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。
C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。
D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。
E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。

为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？

vinbobo

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.
A. that included
B. which includes
C. including
D. some of which were
E. among them being

选项分析：
A． 引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。
B． 根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。
C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。
D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。
E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。

为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？

-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好
including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了
不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了

布布布布布丁

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A． 引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B． 根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

vinbobo

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A． 引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B． 根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/9 0:45:40)

饿，简单的说
修饰名词需要靠近修饰，但是这里修饰语和名词之间隔了两个修饰词，因此太远
介词形式修饰的是句子，所以句子到哪里，就修饰到哪里，但是，根据绝大多数题目，逗号后面介词组在修辞上并不是修饰posts，而是修饰句子的，所以理论上跟句子的主语关系更近。不知道这么说你觉得如何

vinbobo

另外，这里修饰的对象是“ to several posts”

布布布布布丁

United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the Democratic Party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the Democratic Senatorial Committee.A. that includedB. which includesC. includingD. some of which wereE. among them being选项分析：A． 引导普通的非限定定语从句用which；改为which后，which与所指的posts相隔太远，也不太好。B． 根据句意，定语从句应该修饰several posts，故为复数，使用includes错误,并且时态上讲应该使用一般过去时；which与所指的posts相隔太远，不好。C． Correct；including比which included更为简洁、明确，including介词短语修饰前面短语的核心词posts。D． some of which与所指的posts相隔太远。E． Being累赘；among them being修饰对象不明确(awkward)，并且无法引导独立主格。为什么除介词之外的其他形式都不能修饰核心词汇？为什么介词形式可以修饰核心词汇？-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/8 19:10:19)

这题目其实编写的很垃圾，而且C并非完美，只是相对较好including作为介词，在逗号后面修饰前面的子句，因此只有它够长可以够到posts，逻辑上其实有些模糊.D选项的结构其实蛮好的，只是隔了两个介词修饰结构太远了不过个人觉得C/D不一定谁好，不过既然 GMAC是老大，只能背下来了-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/8 21:18:38)

唔。。赶脚这位仁兄还是木有回答我的问题啊。。

-- by 会员 布布布布布丁 (2011/11/9 0:45:40)

饿，简单的说
修饰名词需要靠近修饰，但是这里修饰语和名词之间隔了两个修饰词，因此太远
介词形式修饰的是句子，所以句子到哪里，就修饰到哪里，但是，根据绝大多数题目，逗号后面介词组在修辞上并不是修饰posts，而是修饰句子的，所以理论上跟句子的主语关系更近。不知道这么说你觉得如何

-- by 会员 vinbobo (2011/11/9 7:38:31)

唔，介词词组修饰整个句子？有木有例句支持这种说法啊