大全190...to 和 for兩者的差異

[liwuu]

190.By showing that South Africa does not have a free market and is in fact a kind of collectivist welfare state for Whites only, Sowell argues that American conservatives have no valid ideological grounds to be in sympathy with the Pretoria regime.
(A) to be in sympathy with
(B) to sympathize with
(C) for sympathizing with
(D) that they should sympathize with
(E) that they should have sympathy for

答案是C...請問一下和B的意思不同點?!我只會背for表原因,to表目的...但是這一題我就掛了!!

[Pufa]

這題考的是慣用語。
▶REASON◀
grounds[ plural]a good reason for doing, believing, or saying something
grounds for (doing) something
Mental cruelty can be grounds for divorce .
There are strong grounds for believing his statement.
have grounds to do something
Did the police have reasonable grounds to arrest him?
on moral/legal/medical etc grounds
The proposal was rejected on environmental grounds.
on (the) grounds of something
Flying was ruled out on grounds of cost.
'You're under arrest.' 'On what grounds?'
on the grounds that
We oppose the bill, on the grounds that it discriminates against women.

for在意思等於because時，必須將for放在句中，前面加上逗號。
for也可以用來表示某物的目的，比如說：(longman)
a knife for cutting bread
What did you do that for?
I've bought him a watch for his birthday.
the documents prepared for his defence.

[liwuu]

照上面的解釋,那麼這一題答案應該就變成B囉...have no valid ideological grounds to sympathize with...,可是答案是C?!再幫我看一下囉...

[魚]

我也不會 :'( , 請高人指點

[Pufa]

CD上大牛Stoneren的解釋:
have grounds for doing sth / have grounds for sth 是標準文法表達
have grounds to do 的表達的確有，但不是正式的文書表達方式

[魚]

不過 打個岔


好像以前的紙筆考題材會考這種小鼻子的死記東東

近年的題目比較活 就算不知道固定搭配 通常兜還有cue

這裡都沒有 :(

[bugubugu]

這題我當時補習時老師有講解...
莫北北說是考介系詞...
當理由的介係詞要接for...
所以答案選C...

[dibert8]

"for + Ving" vs "to +V" 如果繞著理由,目的在打轉,說實在分不太出來; 原因和目的,看起來像一體的兩面.有沒有別的辦法?
從Pufa給的例子,倒是發現 for 用在抽象的概念(e.g.想法,想要做什麼), to-V 用在具體的動作(e.g.去執行)
"There are strong grounds for believing his statement." believe 是看不到動作的.
"Did the police have reasonable grounds to arrest him?" arrest 有具體的動作.
本題: "have no valid ideological grounds for sympathizing with the Pretoria regime" sympathize 是做不出來的.
This is a knife for cutting bread. (說明而已,沒有真的切麵包)
I need a knife to cut the bread. (動作接著就來)
不知老美是不真的如此?參考參考,再討論...

[dibert8]

另一個觀察: for 用於非限定; to-V 是限定用法
再借Pufa的例子:
There are strong grounds for believing his statement. 這裡一定要用 for , 因為 there are 沒限定主詞.
We have strong grounds for believing his statement. 可能意思是 We have strong grounds for people to believe his statement.
We have strong grounds to believe his statement. 意思是 We believe his statement.
The police have reasonable grounds to arrest him. 的確! 不是別人, the police 逮捕他.
本題: "American conservatives have no valid ideological grounds for sympathizing with the Pretoria regime" 因為 American conservatives 沒有明確指誰:非限定, 所以用 for.
有沒有題可以驗證呢?再看看吧!

[dibert8]

從修飾的觀點: for +Ving (adv.) 修飾動詞, to +V (adj., n.) 修飾主詞(人)
There are strong grounds for believing his statement. 一定用 for; 用 to +V 沒有動作者.
"We have strong grounds for believing his statement." for believing 修飾 have (strong grounds). i.e. What we have is grounds, which leads to believing.
"The police have reasonable grounds to arrest him." to arrest 因 the police 而起.
不知還有沒有別的想法?