prep 221 ： v+ing 的用法

olivia瓜瓜

GWD12-Q34:
Q34:

In an attempt to guarantee the security of its innovative water purification method, the company required each employee to sign a confidentiality agreement prohibiting that its water purification methods be disclosed to companies using an analogous purification process.
A.prohibiting that its water purification methods be disclosed to companies
B.prohibiting them from the disclosing of its water purification methods to any company
C.prohibiting disclosure of its water purification methods to any company
D.that would prohibit them from disclosure of its water purification methods to companies
E.that would prohibit its water purification methods to be disclosed to a company


答案是c。 但是perp语法笔记上说 agreement的内容用现在分词做定语修饰更合适。
1 :我觉得这个什么law'agreement 等倾向用ing 的说法过于绝对，这里语法笔记里解释分词修饰比从句修饰更好也过于绝对，显然用定语从句修饰比用ing 修饰产生歧义要少。

2: 我觉得这里的prohibiting 不能做agreement的定语修饰， 具体的 for example ‘

G10-39  For members of the seventeenth-century Ashantination in Africa, animal-hide shields with wooden frames were essential itemsof military equipment, a method to protect warriors against enemy arrowsand spears.
A.     a method to protect
B.     as a method protecting
C.     protecting  
D.    as a protection of
E.     to protect

Choice C is best because the participle protecting begins a phrase that explains what the shields did. Choices A and B awkwardly use the singular word method to refer to items of military equipment rather than to the use of such items. Also, a method of protecting would be more idiomatic than a method to protect in A or a method protecting in B. In B and D, as is incorrect; also, a protection in D has no noun for which it can logically substitute. Choice E is incomplete; used to protect would have been acceptable

3 我在这里的理解是v+ing 在这里做的状语，即the company required 开始的这句话目的状语，因为并不是这个agreement 来制止这个行为，而是公司要求员工签订这个协议来制止后面的发生。
我就不知道V+ing前面无逗号时有没有失去做状语的功能！！？

求各位大n指点：）

olivia瓜瓜

顶起

kiwifoodtown

prohibiting这里无法作状语，只能作定语来修饰agreement，用来表述agreement内容，首先，从形式上分词作状语，必须用逗号加以分隔。另外，最重要的一点，如果prohibiting作状语，它的逻辑主语必定是the company，然而从句子的意思上看，prohibiting逻辑主语为agreement，所以说prohibiting这里必定是定语。

olivia瓜瓜

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-9-10 08:56
prohibiting这里无法作状语，只能作定语来修饰agreement，用来表述agreement内容，首先，从形式上分词作状 ...

无逗号的v+ing 一定是不能做状语的么？
我查了一下prohibit的用法，确实没有表一个主体人或团体来prohibit balal，是law agreement 等来后面跟prohibit 。所以这里应该是ing 做定语修饰前面的agreement。
还有cd 上说law agreement 在修饰时用ing 的说法我认为有些绝对，很多地方，包括一些权威例句都用了which 或that从句都可以来修饰law agreement。

olivia瓜瓜

例：
...a law that prohibits tobacco advertising in newspapers and magazines.
…一项禁止在报纸和杂志上刊登烟草广告的法律。

Laws which prohibit the promotion of independence from China or communism are not generally enforced.          (27KB)
BBC: Taiwan country profile

kiwifoodtown

olivia瓜瓜 发表于 2013-9-10 09:37
无逗号的v+ing 一定是不能做状语的么？
我查了一下prohibit的用法，确实没有表一个主体人或团体来prohibi ...

是的，不信你去找一下有哪个分词做状语没有用分隔的？

kiwifoodtown

olivia瓜瓜 发表于 2013-9-10 09:37
无逗号的v+ing 一定是不能做状语的么？
我查了一下prohibit的用法，确实没有表一个主体人或团体来prohibi ...

这里，现在分词的作用和定语从句一样。

olivia瓜瓜

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-9-10 12:34
是的，不信你去找一下有哪个分词做状语没有用分隔的？

我分析了INg的题，是没有发现无逗号的做ing状语的。。
但是逗号—+ ing分词 没有失去做定语的功能。

kiwifoodtown

olivia瓜瓜 发表于 2013-9-10 12:59
我分析了INg的题，是没有发现无逗号的做ing状语的。。
但是逗号—+ ing分词 没有失去做定语的功能。 ...

逗号—+ ing分词 没有失去做定语的功能, 不等于作状语也可以不用逗号分隔。

olivia瓜瓜

kiwifoodtown 发表于 2013-9-11 09:59
逗号—+ ing分词 没有失去做定语的功能, 不等于作状语也可以不用逗号分隔。 ...

我想表达的也就是这个意思，谢谢啦