请教几个比较的问题

reebe

这是篇关于比较从句省略不可多得的好贴，顶了！

chantal891121

多谢大家的讨论，C兄说的谓语比较，是否可以理解成是谓语成分的比较，即than+比较状语从句修饰谓语，这样就不用特别考究或纠结比较的对象一定要对等，因为对比的可能就是逻辑上面的一个意思？

(1). Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours (for our own time).

这句是不是能理解成表语比较：as disturbing v.s. compelling

(2). Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought. 这句是不是可以补足为：

Modern humans developed much earlier than (they were) previously thought (to develop). 其实就是than引导一个比较状语从句修饰谓语develop。

-- by 会员 haiwen (2012/4/2 10:04:46)

因为判断比较对象，就是为了判断出哪些成分能省略哪些成分不能省略，可以用排除法排除掉错误的，也可以自己写成正确的。要是你先还原为比较状语从句，到最后你还是要去判断各个成分省略的可行性，因为这是GMAT中很重要的考点，出比较结构的题考点基本上就是这个。
个人觉得，要是以比较状语从句的思路去做的话，你可能还要先还原句子，就多了一步。
不知道我所描述的你的思路是不是正确，不过我觉得，要是你自己认为这个方法更适合你，还是用自己更好，更得心应手吧！

(1). Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours (for our own time).

这句话，分细点说，有三个比较点，一个是系动词were和are（说它是一个比较点因为前后的时间发生了变化），一个是表语的disturbing和compelling，一个是状语的to his own time和for ours。

（2）Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought.
解答该句，你可以先看看你问的那个例子
Their diets were more varied than had been supposed
这句话还原是：Their diets were more varied than theyhad been supposedto be

你看我前面有写的：当比较对象是类似于expect\suppose\ought\think等表示主观的谓语动词时，省略主语，保留该动词且形式不变，省略补足成分

如果原句是你改的这样，
Modern humans developed much earlier than (they were) previously thought (to develop).
省略后就应该是
Modern humans developed much earlier than  were previously thought.

下面这个例子也是一样的道理：
Progress with the building of the bridge was not good as was expected

justinyip

好贴，顶

haiwen

请教一下chantal891121 PREP07里面有一道题：
Scientists have found signs that moving water changed the chemical makeup of the surface of Mars
in recent eras and have therefore concluded that the planet's crust harbors up to three times as much
water as perviously thought.

这句的宾语从句： The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as perviously thought.  如果还原的话应该是什么呢？

如果说是The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as (the crust was) perviously thought 那么was应该不能省略
如果说是The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as (scientists) perviously thought  那么as后面的主语sientists和前面的主语crust不一致应该不能省略啊？

haiwen

再请教一个：
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice
as fast as they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them
on special diets.
prep语法笔记的解释是：正确的表现了原句的逻辑意思,既供应商养殖鱼类的生长速度和鱼类自然生产速度作比
注意：两个比较点这里的grow意思不同，前者是种植(vt)，后者是生长(vi)，所以是不是可以理解成两个比较点
suppliers vs fish，grow种植 vs grow生长

alicezyk

求解答。。。。。。。。。。。。

alicezyk

求解答~~~~~~~~~~~！