ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

The Wallerstein study indicates that even after a decade young men and women still experience some of the effects of a divorce occurring when a child.

正确答案: D

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2131|回复: 6
打印 上一主题 下一主题

og001, 请nn指点

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-12-8 23:05:00 | 只看该作者

og001, 请nn指点

1. The Wallerstein study indicates that even after a decade young men and women still experience some of the effects of a divorce occurring when a child.


(A)  occurring when a child


(B)  occurring when children


(C)  that occurred when a child


(D)  that occurred when they were children


(E)  that has occurred as each was a child


Choice D is best. The phrasing a divorce that occurred when they were children correctly uses the relative clause that occurred to modify a divorce and includes a pronoun and verb (they were) that refer unambiguously to their antecedent, men and women. Choice A incorrectly introduces the when... phrase with occurring, thus illogically making divorce the grammatical referent of when a child; furthermore, the singular child does not agree with the plural men and women. B replaces child with children but otherwise fails to correct A's errors of structure and logic, and C corrects only the error created by occurring. Choice E includes an incorrect verb tense (has occurred) and wrongly replaces when with as. Also, each was does not properly refer to men and women.


and C corrects only the error created by occurring. ,请教occurring犯了什么错?是不是说如果选项写成occurring when they were children一样是错的?


请nn指点!

沙发
发表于 2004-12-8 23:18:00 | 只看该作者

bebrave mm,

强烈推荐先参考GMAT大区各版块的置顶贴,好东东多多!相信它们可以解决你大部分问题。

本语法区置顶贴有:

语法区第一贴 -《语法区版规》

[推荐]GMAT单科捷进之语法备考方法篇

GMAT语法复习资料库

GMAT语法知识点精华贴分类汇总

GMAT语法讨论链接总录

如果阅读完上述相关内容仍未能解决你的问题,欢迎发帖继续讨论。发帖一定要注意“版规”里的要求哦。谢谢!

祝你复习过程顺利、愉快!

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-12-8 23:33:00 | 只看该作者

我搜索过了,没找到。

菜鸟手册里有注解:

that定语从句和分词的区别:分词相当于非限定定语从句,而限定定语从句和非限定定语从句的区别是局部和范围的区别,所表达的意思有很大的差异。

但我还是不太明白, 因为我分词相当于非限定定语从句好像说得太绝对了,而我在语法书里看到对限定非限定的区别是:

Restrictive elements are never set off with punctuation.

Nonrestrictive elements are always set off with punctuation.

如果这样的话,occurring的错就不是菜鸟手册上的原因。。。还是请NN指点一下吧!

地板
发表于 2004-12-8 23:44:00 | 只看该作者

mm,你对限定性修饰与非限定性修饰的理解是对的。

现在分词: 作定语时强调动作的多次性、重复性和客观性、强调动作OG102/113
如政府的发令 directive, sentence doing 有强制性OG222
定语从句: 强调动作的一次性、具体时间、具体行为、强调状态OG96

5#
发表于 2004-12-9 00:21:00 | 只看该作者
我这个人就喜欢否定一切.不要去看菜鸟手册,就凭你义务教育学到的那点语法知识你都可以首先排除A和B.从事件发生先后可以知道,DIVORCE是以前发生的,没有可能用OCCURRING的.

GMAT语法需要记住的主要是一些不在语法书中的习惯用法.读多语法书的理论只会使自己变糊涂.
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2004-12-9 00:22:00 | 只看该作者
谢谢les, 解释得太清楚了,
7#
 楼主| 发表于 2004-12-9 00:27:00 | 只看该作者

  p200002,是呀,

做题,查书,搞来搞去,我常常糊涂掉!

我正烦恼呢,半天才看了5题,我是不是世界上最慢的人?

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, 2024-5-11 23:36
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