ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: tony6
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD12-20

[复制链接]
11#
发表于 2004-11-27 14:53:00 | 只看该作者
自己UP 以下
12#
发表于 2004-11-30 20:26:00 | 只看该作者

我觉得选D

A: awkward

13#
发表于 2005-4-2 04:05:00 | 只看该作者
小声问一下,20题中的April 24,1800前面为什么不加介词on呢?
14#
发表于 2005-6-22 20:30:00 | 只看该作者

这题答案支持A,但是我对于B错在哪里还是不清晰, 是不是分词和从句的并列修饰不好? 还是其它什么原因? Thanks

15#
发表于 2005-6-23 16:32:00 | 只看该作者

Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress that made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also established the Library of Congress.







  1. Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress that made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also established
  2. The act of Congress, which was approved April 24, 1800, making provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also established making有歧义,是修饰前面的which was approved April 24, 1800,还是修饰The act of Congress,不清楚。错。
  3. The act of Congress approved April 24, 1800, which made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., and established approved错,应该是被动语态。法案被批准。
  4. Approved April 24, 1800, making provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., the act of Congress also established 类似B的错误,making修饰不明确。making是修饰Approved April 24, 1800还是修饰the act of Congress? 不清楚。错。
  5. Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also establishing establishing用ing形式,表示伴随状态,意思改变了。意思变成了政府去新城市,这个动作建立了国会图书馆。实际上政府去新城市和建立国会图书馆是两个不同的动作和结果。
16#
发表于 2005-6-23 16:38:00 | 只看该作者

The act of Congress, which was approved April 24, 1800, making provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also established making有歧义,是修饰前面的which was approved April 24, 1800,还是修饰The act of Congress,不清楚。错。


印象中分词在句中应该是做定语的, 这里的which结构中没有可以被限定的名词. 我觉得不是这个原因.

17#
发表于 2005-7-13 11:21:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用Avantasia在2005-6-23 16:38:00的发言:

>


印象中分词在句中应该是做定语的, 这里的which结构中没有可以被限定的名词. 我觉得不是这个原因.


版主说说B为什么错吧。我没选B,不过只是凭感觉,B到底有什么措我也不知道,可能the act of Congress,which这种形式(A of B which,A不等于one/the one)也不是ETS所喜欢的。自己瞎总结的,NN们指教!

18#
发表于 2005-7-13 18:05:00 | 只看该作者
B里面我觉得making引导的结构有夹心修饰的嫌疑, 分不清是修饰前面的congress还是后面的washington, 而且分词和被修饰对像之间加了定语从句, 从这点上说, 没有直接用定语从句来的有效, 另外B的which was approved相比直接用approved也虑嫌烦琐.
19#
发表于 2005-8-5 12:14:00 | 只看该作者
A的谓语是什么啊?established 吗?但是为什么前面还要加also呢?前面没有其他谓语并列了啊?
20#
发表于 2005-9-4 11:27:00 | 只看该作者

d到底哪里错了



只是觉得ETS好像不喜欢ved&ving放在一起修饰一个东西,是这个原因吗?


[此贴子已经被作者于2005-9-4 11:28:55编辑过]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-27 19:28
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部