求问OG Diagnostic Test语法的49题.

riveryang114

OG Diagnostic Test的49题.

As an actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
(A)    Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
(B)    Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
(C)    Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors whose ranks included
(D)    one of the most influential artists in the American theater was Stella Adler, who trained several generations of actors including
(E)    one of the most influential artists in the American theater, Stella Adler, trained several generations of actors whose ranks included

正确答案是ｃ。Ａ不对的一个原因是因为The clause who trained... describes Stella Adler, yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theater rather than Adler.

但是在４３题中，

Despite the increasing number of women graduating from law school and passing bar examinations, the proportion of judges and partners at major law firms who are women has not risen comparably (这个已经是正确的句子了)

在这个句子中,who are women并没有直接放在 judges and partners的后面，而是放在 at major law firms,为什么在这个句子中who are women可以跳过at major law firms去修饰judges and partners?

我在想我是漏了知识点了。。。。

谢谢各位了，大家加油！！

riveryang114

有米有人知道捏？？

mongmong

我也想问同样的问题，就搜到这个贴了

V3会长

第一个是非限定性定语从句，就近修饰逗号前面的名词，第二个定语从句不是非限定性的，根据逻辑推理修饰judges and partners

mongmong

第一个是非限定性定语从句，就近修饰逗号前面的名词，第二个定语从句不是非限定性的，根据逻辑推理修饰judges and partners

-- by 会员 V3会长 (2012/3/28 16:34:54)

所以非限定性定语从句必须就近修饰逗号前面的名词(参考以下例子)，不可以像限定性定语从句一样根据逻辑推理？

Diagnostic 第35题对选项A “unlike the buildings in Mesopotamian cities, which were arranged haphazardly, the same basic plan ....”的解释是


it needs to be clear that it was the buildings in the cities that were arranged haphazardly rather than the cities.


not clear whether which were arranged haphazardly modifies cities or buildings

多谢！

mongmong

另外A选项应该用限制性从句对吗？

mongmong

那个43题，who are women修饰的是 1) judges and 2) partners at major law firms

那个at major law firms只修饰partners，所以这里定语从句已经尽量靠近修饰词了。

mongmong

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_SC/thread-432087-1-1.html?postid=13798236&searchmode=TopicContent&searchtext=Stella%20Adler

觉得这个贴有参考意义

aeoluseros

第一个是非限定性定语从句，就近修饰逗号前面的名词，第二个定语从句不是非限定性的，根据逻辑推理修饰judges and partners

-- by 会员 V3会长 (2012/3/28 16:34:54)

所以非限定性定语从句必须就近修饰逗号前面的名词(参考以下例子)，不可以像限定性定语从句一样根据逻辑推理？

Diagnostic 第35题对选项A “unlike the buildings in Mesopotamian cities, which were arranged haphazardly, the same basic plan ....”的解释是


it needs to be clear that it was the buildings in the cities that were arranged haphazardly rather than the cities.


not clear whether which were arranged haphazardly modifies cities or buildings

多谢！

-- by 会员 mongmong (2012/3/29 9:14:56)

..yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theater rather than Adler. ...
OG的这句话，感觉没什么道理... relative clause跳跃修饰是很常见的，不需要immediately after the noun or pronoun. 而且它也没指明是限制性还是非限制性。

GMAT里面which引导的非限制性定从是有类似mongmong说的这个另类的规定，但是其他关系代词引导的关系分句，真的没见过。对于这个A选项，我喜欢这么理解：A选项里who的修饰对象，相对于one来讲，因为就近原则更倾向于修饰the most influential artists. 至少，在这两个修饰对象之间是有歧义的。为避免这个歧义，确实应该“must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies“，使之确定修饰到stella Alter或者one。但是这个规则不能推广到所有的relative clause，要不然逻辑上不严密。 this clause follows theater rather than Adler，这最后半个分句的解释，也显得有些画蛇添足，who在逻辑上如何也不会修饰到theater。。diagnostic test的解释质量貌似没有后面专门sc的解释来得高。

43题，逻辑上who只能够修饰 the proportion of judges and partners，而不可能修饰firms，因为firms不是人。语法上 proportion of judges and partners 前面有个the，把who的修饰对象锁定到了  the proportion of judges and partners

mongmong

多谢Aeo童鞋！

那么Diagnostic 第35题对选项A的解释是不是也不尽正确?也不能就说这里which的指代就是有误？


Diagnostic 第35题对选项A “unlike the buildings in Mesopotamian cities, which were arranged haphazardly, the same basic plan ....”的解释是

it needs to be clear that it was the buildings in the cities that were arranged haphazardly rather than the cities.

not clear whether which were arranged haphazardly modifies cities or buildings