对于which跳跃修饰的困惑有没有人帮忙讲解一下 不胜感激啊亲们

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-18 18:27
这里偏了，我不是告诉你G完全不考语法，为什么有语法？是为了有效 准确的传递我们的意思，才构造了语法 ...

你这么一说我貌似灵光一闪了
做题还是要结合语法和逻辑 有些题目语法对有可能逻辑多层含义 则排除；有些题目虽然知道逻辑上有误但是不能直接否定这种逻辑 毕竟语法还是要遵循的是吧？

因为which 不能跳过谓语动词，修饰的只能是the largest lake或者earth，不能直接因为逻辑不通而否定which修饰earth的可能，因为语法上which 还是符合就近修饰的，这样理解有偏吗？

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-18 18:27
这里偏了，我不是告诉你G完全不考语法，为什么有语法？是为了有效 准确的传递我们的意思，才构造了语法 ...

我刚才又去分析了一下这两句话：

Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,  is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.
这句话里 a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission,(简写为A called B ）若B 去掉，A单独存在时B没有意义的因而which应该修饰的是一个整体所以不能就近修饰emission。

A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.
这句话里面called proton-induced X-ray emission作为插入语可以不看，至于A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants， which我还是有疑问了。我认为 originally developed for detecting air pollutants 如果去掉了a technique 的也无法表达意思了，也就是说也该成为一个UNIT 来修饰啊 为什么会存在就近修饰pollutant 的歧义啊？

旺财财

sunyuwei 发表于 2014-9-18 19:31
我刚才又去分析了一下这两句话：

Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique ca ...

, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission这里有一个等价关系，看到了么
a technique = proton-induced X-ray emission
所以修饰 proton-induced X-ray emission是合理的。
而A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which 这里修饰的是proton-induced X-ray emission失去了A的这层关系，这是distort meaning~~~

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-18 19:39
, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission这里有一个等价关系，看到了么
a technique = proto ...

原来你是这样考虑的撒。。。

1.你说的等价关系我明白，但是这说明你承认了这道题中which的就近指代 可是我觉得不应该就近啊 他修饰的应该是 a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission这个整体（再极端一点说应该是修饰的核心词technique啊（虽然其实两个含义是相同的）

2.我承认我吧 called proton-induced X-ray emission当做插入语删掉有点奇葩。。但是我看到有帖子说which修饰pollutant我就凌乱了

旺财财

sunyuwei 发表于 2014-9-18 19:49
原来你是这样考虑的撒。。。

1.你说的等价关系我明白，但是这说明你承认了这道题中which的就近指代 可是 ...

你没必要争论到底在修饰pollutant还是proton-induced X-ray emission
你get it了这两个都是distort 了intended meaning~~不就ok了么~~
至于究竟修饰哪个，我认为没有必要争论，这是个错误选项，在错误选项里nit picking是meaningless和time consuming的~~~

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-18 20:01
你没必要争论到底在修饰pollutant还是proton-induced X-ray emission
你get it了这两个都是distort 了int ...

我只是想把which修饰这个知识点彻底搞明白 不想没搞明白到时候又被打击到

如果我把called 那部分当做插入语删掉了以后 我不觉得是修饰pollutant的，因为A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants是有效整体，which还是应该跳跃修饰technique

Satanilles

它这个必须不是定律！是来帮你理解A选项的，楼主不要尝试总结一条铁律出来啊

旺财财

sunyuwei 发表于 2014-9-18 20:07
我只是想把which修饰这个知识点彻底搞明白 不想没搞明白到时候又被打击到

如果我把called 那部分当做插 ...

楼下那位亲的话很在理。
然后
I can see what you're saying here, but nouns that are modified by prepositional phrases can still be the referent of 'which' even if they are a few words distant from it.
This usually happens when the immediately preceding noun is grammatically incompatible with the verb after "which".

For example: "The picture of my brothers, which was taken last year in Mexico, is one of my favorites."

You might object to this sentence on the grounds that 'which' might be taken to modify 'brothers'. And, in a strict sort of way, you'd be right. But here's the catch: There's really no other reasonable way to write this sentence. You just can't get 'picture' next to the 'which' clause without creating total nonsense, or splitting the sentence into 2 smaller sentence-ettes.
plus, 'brothers' is plural, and is incompatible with 'which WAS'.

This is an interesting point, though, and subtle at that. I believe that we are working on getting it into our forthcoming strategy guide.
The difference is in the placement of the various phrases.

A: "(opening modifier), (noun) (modified by necessary descriptive phrase), which" - in this structure, which refers to the noun. Note that the few words right after "technique" are simply the name of that technique. These words ("technique called proton-induced X-ray emission") collectively make up the extended noun phrase to which "which" refers. The single-word noun is technique but the other words are necessary to understand what technique we're talking about.

C: "(Noun) (modifier), (modifer), which" - in this structure, we've separated what had been the necessary descriptive phrase from the noun, so it is no longer a part of any extended noun phrase. As a result, the "which" in this case really does only apply to "emission" rather than to a "technique called emission" b/c "a technique called emission" as a simple noun phrase, is no longer part of the sentence.

这是instructor~~的解答~~~希望能给你一点clarity~~

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-19 08:47
楼下那位亲的话很在理。
然后
I can see what you're saying here, but nouns that are modified by pre ...

今天回的好早哈

我仔细看看啊 看完给你反馈

sunyuwei

旺财财 发表于 2014-9-19 08:47
楼下那位亲的话很在理。
然后
I can see what you're saying here, but nouns that are modified by pre ...

仔细的看了你的话我总结出我看这段话的心得，不知道有没有错或是遗漏了什么重要的点，麻烦看看哈

1.which存在就近修饰是没有错误的，但是有一点要清楚就是有些情况下逻辑上是不适合就近的。就像example中的The picture of my brothers, which was taken last year in Mexico, is one of my favorites."of my brother'这部分是用来修饰the picture的，少了of my brothers，the picture是不能单独不能表达原来的含义，也就是你所说的The picture of my brothers是一个UNIT，而且也没有别的方式去表达这样一句话，因而which 修饰的是the picture.不像是我上次的拿到题目....on earth，which. On earth并不是前面表达的必要成分所以which 修饰的有可能是earth

2.a technique called emission  中，called emission 是用来帮助理解technique 的，同时少了这部分a technique 不能单独表达原意，所以which 用来修饰technique 而另一句中called emission,这部分是是可有可无的,不影响前面所要表达的含义，所以which 用来修饰emission..