OG222

xionghuixh

222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary(任意的，自由决定的) powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.

(A)              enabling it to withhold from the public

(B)              for it to withhold from the public(用不定式，成了目的状语，主语应该是supreme court, nonsense…)

(C)             for withholding disclosure to the public of

(D)             that enable them to withhold from public disclosure

(E)              that they can withhold public disclosure of

Choice A is best: enabling ... clearly modifies powers, it refers logically and grammatically to the Central Intelligence Agency, and to withhold from the public is concisely and idiomatically phrased. In choices B and C, the preposition for is used unidiomatically in place of the "-ing" modifier to introduce the phrase describing powers. In choices C, D, and E, withholding)... disclosure is wordy and imprecise, since it is really the identities that are to be withheld. The plural pronouns them in D and they in E do not agree with the singular Agency, and that in E mistakenly introduces a new independent clause rather than a modifying phrase for

powers.

这里为什么不可以用从句修饰powers?(如红字所示)

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-12 13:25:33编辑过]

zqwei

抛开E中其它的错误不谈，

单纯从修饰来看,ETS认为分词短语优于从句去修饰中心词,

理由是更简洁，并且与中心词的关系更明确!

xionghuixh

那OG15

15. In his research paper, Dr. Frosh, medical director of the Payne Whitney Clinic, distinguishes mood swings. which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis.

(A)  mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(B)  mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis ,

(C) between mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(D) between mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(E)  genuine manic-depressive psychosis and mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease

The best choice is C because it uses the idiomatically correct expression distinguishes between x and y and because it provides a structure in which the relative clause beginning which may be violent clearly modifies mood swings. The other choices use distinguishes in unidiomatic constructions. Additionally, their in A is intrusive and unnecessary, and the modifier of mood swings in B and D (perhaps violent) is awkward and less clear than the more developed clause which may be violent.

为什么说in B and D (perhaps violent) is awkward and less clear than the more developed clause which may be violent.

需用句子而不用短语???

心晴

以下是引用xionghuixh在2004-10-12 13:24:00的发言：

222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary(任意的，自由决定的) powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.

(A)              enabling it to withhold from the public

(B)              for it to withhold from the public(用不定式，成了目的状语，主语应该是supreme court, nonsense…)

(C)             for withholding disclosure to the public of

(D)             that enable them to withhold from public disclosure

(E)              that they can withhold public disclosure of

Choice A is best: enabling ... clearly modifies powers, it refers logically and grammatically to the Central Intelligence Agency, and to withhold from the public is concisely and idiomatically phrased. In choices B and C, the preposition for is used unidiomatically in place of the "-ing" modifier to introduce the phrase describing powers. In choices C, D, and E, withholding)... disclosure is wordy and imprecise, since it is really the identities that are to be withheld. The plural pronouns them in D and they in E do not agree with the singular Agency, and that in E mistakenly introduces a new independent clause rather than a modifying phrase for

powers.

这里为什么不可以用从句修饰powers?(如红字所示)

我感觉不是不能用从句修饰，而是因为这个从句是错的吧！E中的they很明显指代对象不对啊，应该指代Central Intelligence Agency的，可是这个Agency是单数。

心晴

以下是引用xionghuixh在2004-10-13 4:56:00的发言：

那OG15

15. In his research paper, Dr. Frosh, medical director of the Payne Whitney Clinic, distinguishes mood swings. which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis.

(A)  mood swings, which may be violent without their being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(B)  mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis ,

(C) between mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease, and genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(D) between mood swings, perhaps violent without being grounded in mental disease, from genuine manic-depressive psychosis

(E)  genuine manic-depressive psychosis and mood swings, which may be violent without being grounded in mental disease

The best choice is C because it uses the idiomatically correct expression distinguishes between x and y and because it provides a structure in which the relative clause beginning which may be violent clearly modifies mood swings. The other choices use distinguishes in unidiomatic constructions. Additionally, their in A is intrusive and unnecessary, and the modifier of mood swings in B and D (perhaps violent) is awkward and less clear than the more developed clause which may be violent.

为什么说in B and D (perhaps violent) is awkward and less clear than the more developed clause which may be violent.

需用句子而不用短语???

这个我感觉是修饰对象问题，用which修饰的是mood swings,而短语，修饰的distinguish，好像是哪个NN说的限定性和非限定性定语从句的区别，这个偶也拿不太准，使用这个规则一时判断对一时判断不对的，希望哪位NN再出来讲解一下，最好陪个例子

OasisWater

首先要区分doing和从句；doing表示某物的持续性动作或者永久属性，一般咱法令，法规等后面都采用doing的限定性修饰，只要该法令存在，那么其内容就是有效的；OG中应该有不少这样的用法；；；

babypace

从句一般只修饰前面紧跟的先行词，分词可以跳跃修饰，也可以就近修饰。分词的修饰有时候必须从意思和逻辑上理解才能选出正确答案，这个比较难些。

og222，that从句修饰discretionary powers?不和逻辑的。另外they在that从句中使用也是错误的。

Pudding

og222，that从句修饰discretionary powers?不和逻辑的。另外they在that从句中使用也是错误的。

E的錯誤其實是多重的, 包含:錯誤使用從句(修飾的先行詞不明), 單複數一致性不正確, 不夠簡潔, 等等...

其實我覺得, 首先就排除掉帶有 "disclosure" 的三個選項了... 因為redundancy...

可是我想問一下: 為什麼不能選B 呢?

(P.S. 我還不太會用 "引用" 的功能...)

stellate

and that in E mistakenly introduces a new independent clause rather than a modifying phrase for

powers.

这里为什么不可以用从句修饰powers?(如红字所示)

这个解释已经很清楚了，原句是一个限定成分，如果改成定语从句变成非限定成分。关系不够紧密。

区别可以简单翻译一下看看：原句是说授予sb一种使sb能够。。。的sth

如果变成从句意思是：授予sb. sth，这种sth使sb能够。。。

细微的差别在于如果是限定性的，这个sth本身就是以这种功能为目的或具有这种属性的。如果是非限制性的，跟sth本身没有太大关联，只是因为它使sb能够实现这种功能或属性了。

他吃了片消炎药 和 他吃了片药，这片药可以帮助他消炎。前面是说这片药本身就是消炎药，后面只是说了一片药，至于是什么药不知道，总之可以消炎。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-22 19:06:30编辑过]

bigp

这个解释已经很清楚了，原句是一个限定成分，如果改成定语从句变成非限定成分。关系不够紧密。

区别可以简单翻译一下看看：原句是说授予sb一种使sb能够。。。的sth

如果变成从句意思是：授予sb. sth，这种sth使sb能够。。。

细微的差别在于如果是限定性的，这个sth本身就是以这种功能为目的或具有这种属性的。如果是非限制性的，跟sth本身没有太大关联，只是因为它使sb能够实现这种功能或属性了。

他吃了片消炎药 和 他吃了片药，这片药可以帮助他消炎。前面是说这片药本身就是消炎药，后面只是说了一片药，至于是什么药不知道，总之可以消炎。

这个解释精辟，尤其是消炎药的例子，简直是神来之笔，解我多日未开之茅塞。哈哈。谢谢。