现在分词的问题想了很久 希望和大家讨论 学习 进步

peterfang

首先要感谢CD上很多高手的抛砖引玉，你们的很多思想对我的启发很大。这里我想谈谈我对现在分词的一些看法。
GMAT的语法个人觉得是非常好的。一句话， 它体现了简介，清楚，逻辑合理的思维和表达。所以我想说的是GMAT语法逻辑意思是最高境界。
然后转入我想说的一道题：
Neuroscientists, having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood, are now drawing solid conclusions about how the human brain grows and how babies acquire language.

A.Neuroscientists, having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood, are

B.Neuroscientists, having amassed a wealth of knowledge about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood over the past twenty years, and are

C.Neuroscientists amassing a wealth of knowledge about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood over the past twenty years, and are

D.Neuroscientists have amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood,(A)

E.Neuroscientists have amassed, over the past twenty years, a wealth of knowledge about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood,
对于D选项，解释是因为drawing与主句have amassed时态搭配不对，因为主句时态是现在完成时，意味着过去至今的事情，如果要伴随那也要having drawn才行。由此才会有修饰drawing前面名词的嫌疑。
对于此解释，我很同意，只是有一点想法，不知道是否可以。那就是如果我把后面的drawing换成一个词组，如making it possible for sth/sb to draw, 换句话说我把后面的看成是伴随结果，主句是原因，我个人觉得这样是符合逻辑的，不知道大家感觉如何。
所以我觉得我看过一个高手贴说句尾的现在分词做伴随状语不能修饰主句的完成时态要具体情况具体分析。
谢谢，第一次用CD,望大家照顾照顾。

peterfang

这题是OG12 -21， 也是prep 188。希望大家能帮帮看看我的一点想法啊，真诚谢谢各位大牛了。

qiaowin88637

关于D选项为什么错误：
逻辑上now drawing conclusions中draw的动作发出者是Neuroscientists，这说明现在分词结构只能伴随主句动作（如果是伴随结果，则没有逻辑主语，而应该是前面一整句话的逻辑的延伸）。这里修饰歧义，有两种可能性：                                                          ·
1.作伴随修饰Neuroscientists，而前面又是现在完成时，显然have amassed和now drawing的动作无法伴随着同时发生的。那么drawing conclusions就语法上就不合理了            
2.作定语就近修饰adulthood，逻辑意思错误

qiaowin88637

·

wangjieava23

建议看看Ron在Manhattan论坛上对这个题讲解（我偷懒了，没有贴出来）。很精彩的

简单的说, ", ving" 这ving可以是preceding clause的immediate and automatic result.

peterfang

请教楼上的，我去看了Manhattan，貌似说这是OG题不允许在论坛上讨论啊。能否麻烦给个链接，真诚感谢。
另外不知你觉得在这句话中如果改成Neuroscientists积累了很多知识，使得能够得出结论，这样的话句尾Ving是否就可以了呢？

wangjieava23

转自manhattan 论坛：


According to what I can understand:
"drawing solid conclusions about how the human brain grows and how babies acquire language"
is the immediate consequence that follows from,
"having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood".
The neuroscientists have gathered a lot of knowledge about brain development over the past 20 years and they are drawing conclusions based on the knowledge gained.

Isn't the conclusion an immediate consequence of the main action ?
Please let me know if there is a flaw in my understanding.
Many thanks,
Pratik.


that's not an "immediate consequence" -- when we say "immediate consequence, we mean a consequence that is proximate, immediate, and produced as an essentially unavoidable result of the main action.

for instance:

the bullet entered Smith's brain, killing him instantly --> this is an immediate and automatic consequence; if the bullet does this, then smith will be killed.

john scored 90 on the most recent test, raising his overall average by two points --> again, an immediate and automatic consequence; if john gets this score, there will automatically be the stated consequence for his average.

in the problem at hand, drawing new conclusions is not an automatic and essentially unavoidable consequence of amassing the knowledge in question; the researchers must actively go beyond just amassing the knowledge to draw those conclusions.

...........................................................................................
这个同学也是你这样的想法，但是积累知识，和得出确定结论之间的真的不存在一种必然的联系。（搜集资料应该是相对简单的事情吧。）