关于ving的夹心修饰问题，请大神帮助

soulwangh

enkyklios 发表于 2013-12-10 13:54
我想应该是《A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language》不知道对不对
这是一部好到不能再好的语 ...

The same book.
You can search by the number and title ostmodification by nonfinite clauses ;17.28 Postmodification by -ing participle clauses

Don't take me wrong.  Relax, friend.

I do not mean to look down upon traditional grammar.
I just want to say Gmac might not allow "having" to be a noun modifier. Therefore, I may be wrong.
Thus, open to questions.

I didn't know one of my simple replying would stir up your intense emotional response.
My bad. I take the full blame.

enkyklios

soulwangh 发表于 2013-12-10 15:51
The same book.
You can search by the number and title ostmodification by nonfinite clauses ;17.2 ...

应该说我只是对这个现象感兴趣，我不明白为什么有很多人喜欢说gmat的语法云云。事实上gmat只是考试它没有语法。因为它没有给出结论，所有的观点是别人通过考题分析出来的。

传统语法现在应该说有点过气，但是目前大家基本上还都是谈的传统语法。没有见到有人在论坛里说什么系统功能和转换生成方面的东西。

另外你前后说的太不一致。

According to some grammar books, "having done" can serve as non-modifier, but only non-essential one.（这个最好能给出出处）

As for the Neuroscientists sentence, I think it serves as non-essential noun modifier.

             just want to say Gmac might not allow "having" to be a noun modifier.（你上文说是non modifier,你现在又说不允许non-modifier)

另外可能我的书和你的不是一个版本，我在书中没有找你你说的那一页。

我私下里认为“relax, take it easy , my bad ,full blame 云云，都没有必要，我们在讨论问题观点可以尖锐一些（只要有理有据）。但是不要把问题引到情绪上。

cherrytxt

enkyklios 发表于 2013-12-10 11:44
我曾经因为这个问题和版主激烈的争论过，事实上如果理解它的意思确实也没有必要非说它是定语还是状语。但是 ...

有道理！我还有个问题就是：
其实这里的having amassed表示一个动作的状态，这个动作状态与后面主语发出的动作有关，所以根据逻辑含义修饰后句的动作；
如果是S，v-ing（表明一个与主语有关的状态，与后句谓语无关的话），V...那么这里的V-ING可以理解为修饰谓语吗？

enkyklios

cherrytxt 发表于 2013-12-10 17:33
有道理！我还有个问题就是：
其实这里的having amassed表示一个动作的状态，这个动作状态与后面主语发出 ...

事实上having done按照语法书的意思就是不能做定语，这是因为它ving修饰名词不应该有时态的变化。所以它和主语的性质无关。

到于非限定的ving 一般来讲也是修饰动词，我们看大多数的语法书都是这么讲。但是有的语法书上说它们也可以做定语。这时侯就会让人无所适从。我的观点是采取简单实用的说法。但是了解其它的观点。

cherrytxt

enkyklios 发表于 2013-12-10 17:41
事实上having done按照语法书的意思就是不能做定语，这是因为它ving修饰名词不应该有时态的变化。所以它和 ...

明白了，原来这个题的点在having done不是ving.
谢谢你，我也是觉得没有特别绝对的表达法，要看哪个语言表达的清楚，逻辑严谨。

soulwangh

enkyklios 发表于 2013-12-10 16:12
应该说我只是对这个现象感兴趣，我不明白为什么有很多人喜欢说gmat的语法云云。事实上gmat只是考试它没有 ...

pay attention to my helping verb.

1\I think it serves as ;

2\Gmac might not allow .

It is not inconsistent.
The first one is my personal opinion. I am not definitely sure about it. I open it to questions.
The second one means I cannot rule out this possibility and concede it.

It is a common rhetoric in argument writing.

As for "S,Ving,VO" pattern, I agree with you it is not a thing whether the modifier is  a noun modifier or a adverbial modifier.  

According to the post from Ron as follows, it is more likely to be a adverbial modifier.

John, running to catch the bus, slipped on the icy pavement and fell.
--> It would be nonsense to take away the commas, because "John" -- who is just one person -- is impossible to narrow down.
--> "Running to catch the bus" describes John.
--> Importantly, "running to catch the bus" is related to the action of the sentence. (John was running when he slipped and fell.)

--

If this kind of relationship doesn't exist, the __ing modifier is inappropriate.

*Jesse, standing almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> Nonsense, because a height difference has no relationship to the fact that we are brothers.

--

"Which"/"who"/"whom"/"whose" implies no such relationship.

Jesse, who stands almost eight inches taller than me, is my brother.
--> This sentence is fine.

enkyklios

soulwangh 发表于 2013-12-10 19:47
pay attention to my helping verb.

1\I think it serves as  ;

As for the Neuroscientists sentence, I think it serves as non-essential noun modifier.

             just want to say Gmac might not allow "having" to be a noun modifier.

事实上因为那个句子出现在了gmat的正确选项中，如果你如果说gmat不允许出现non -modifier ,又怎么认为它是non modifier?
那你的意思是gmat也认为它是一个状语，语法书上也认为它是一个状语。只有你自己认为它是一个定语？是个意思吗。我都糊涂了

而且如如果是这样语法书上和gmat完全一致怎么有“gmat有自己的语法一说？”

enkyklios

soulwangh 发表于 2013-12-10 19:47
pay attention to my helping verb.

1\I think it serves as  ;

话说回来了，soulwangh应该对这个问题没有困扰，我们也不必争论它。你有电子版的那个语法书？
可以发我一份不

soulwangh

enkyklios 发表于 2013-12-10 19:52
As for the Neuroscientists sentence, I think it serves as non-essential noun modifier.              ...

To sum up, I can't rule out the possibilities. To make my argument more sound, I mentioned and considered these and other possible scenarios.

I think I have already made my point clear.
Otherwise, I am practicing AWA on this post.

LOL

enkyklios

soulwangh 发表于 2013-12-10 20:08
To sum up, I can't rule out the possibilities. To make my argument more sound, I mentioned and c ...

你英语已经很好了，。不用再练啦