Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112
FormosaMBA 傷心咖啡店 • 檢視主題 - [問題]OG256

[問題]OG256

永遠是「句意」為上...文法次之...

版主: shpassion, Traver0818

[問題]OG256

文章Clara » 2005-04-23 07:10

sorry

256

The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.



(A)The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(B)To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius. (C)The only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(D)Writing the only eyewitness account, Pliny the Elder's nephew accounted for the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(E)In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.


當初我在做時
我將,being the only......視為形容詞子句
which was the only......改成的分詞片語去修飾前面的two letters
being應該要省略-->所以錯

跟og 的解釋不一樣?????
我的觀點有錯嗎?
Clara
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 49
註冊時間: 2005-01-06 22:45

文章Behemoth » 2005-04-23 11:13

Eric Chang
MBA Class of 2008
MIT Sloan School of Management
頭像
Behemoth
管理員
管理員
 
文章: 2948
註冊時間: 2004-09-10 18:19
來自: Boston

文章Clara » 2005-04-23 13:46

sorry

256

The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.


(A)The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(B)To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(C)The only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(D)Writing the only eyewitness account, Pliny the Elder's nephew accounted for the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(E)In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.


當初我在做時
我將,being the only......視為形容詞子句
which was the only......改成的分詞片語去修飾前面的two letters
being應該要省略-->所以錯

跟og 的解釋不一樣?????
我的觀點有錯嗎?
Clara
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 49
註冊時間: 2005-01-06 22:45

文章Ethan » 2005-04-23 15:42

應該到你原來post題目的地方進行修改。
Thanks!!
Ethan
高級會員
高級會員
 
文章: 454
註冊時間: 2004-11-02 17:01

文章cocaine » 2005-04-23 20:17

B.og是說being分詞結構錯誤修飾前面那一句話,
所以你說把being拿掉把the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius當作是two letters同位語,我覺得文法上應該是可以.

不過文意上跟原文的句意有差異~~
努力,才有甜蜜的果實
頭像
cocaine
高級會員
高級會員
 
文章: 502
註冊時間: 2004-12-23 23:53
來自: Mar

文章Ethan » 2005-04-23 21:41

cocaine \$m[1]:B.og是說being分詞結構錯誤修飾前面那一句話,
所以你說把being拿掉把the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius當作是two letters同位語,我覺得文法上應該是可以.

不過文意上跟原文的句意有差異~~


Thanks!!
But ......sorry, think it over.
Ethan
高級會員
高級會員
 
文章: 454
註冊時間: 2004-11-02 17:01

文章cocaine » 2005-04-24 00:35

Ethan \$m[1]:
cocaine \$m[1]:B.og是說being分詞結構錯誤修飾前面那一句話,
所以你說把being拿掉把the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius當作是two letters同位語,我覺得文法上應該是可以.

不過文意上跟原文的句意有差異~~


Thanks!!
But ......sorry, think it over.


請問一下,我觀點有問題??請說明一下,讓我明白一下唄~~ ;''(
努力,才有甜蜜的果實
頭像
cocaine
高級會員
高級會員
 
文章: 502
註冊時間: 2004-12-23 23:53
來自: Mar

文章tky » 2005-04-24 17:02

我想B不對的原因是
因為the nephew of Pliny the Elder(S.) wrote(V.) two letters(O.)
已經構成了一個完整的句子了
所以後面加了逗點 開始的句子
,being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius
會形成
(可能是)
1.表修飾前一句的S.(the nephew of Pliny the Elder)
2.或是修飾前面的O.(two letters)
造成修飾對象不清楚(句意不清)

無論being在不在都還是會形成句意不清的狀況
所以being不能算是錯誤的重點(??)

而且
狀況1.更會產生錯誤句意

不知道這樣解釋對不對??

請Ethan大大&其他大大指正^ ^
tky
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 43
註冊時間: 2005-02-17 23:49

文章Ethan » 2005-05-01 12:59

1. 我假如要回答的話,我必須跑到圖書館使用100 mbps的ADSL.所以請先諒解。

2. 假如我被要求不能說真話的話,尤其是說真話會有被永久停權的危險時,那麼我也無法回答了。
Ethan
高級會員
高級會員
 
文章: 454
註冊時間: 2004-11-02 17:01

文章 » 2005-05-01 20:58

Ethan \$m[1]:1. 我假如要回答的話,我必須跑到圖書館使用100 mbps的ADSL.所以請先諒解。

2. 假如我被要求不能說真話的話,尤其是說真話會有被永久停權的危險時,那麼我也無法回答了。


for 2 <----想太多 mt06
白金會員
白金會員
 
文章: 2290
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:24

文章gogotu » 2005-05-09 13:37

,being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius
會形成
(可能是)
1.表修飾前一句的S.(the nephew of Pliny the Elder)
2.或是修飾前面的O.(two letters)
造成修飾對象不清楚(句意不清)

好像不太對喔,OG上有說:
B, the verb phrase that begins being the only eyewitness accounts modifies the subject of the preceding clause, suggesting nonsensically that the nephew of Pliny the Elder himself was the eyewitness accounts
這個也不難判定:
1. s v o, V-ing 則V-ing是形容S
2. s v o V-ing 則V-ing是形容O[/sup]
gogotu
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 50
註冊時間: 2005-03-31 15:02

文章Janet » 2005-10-26 14:34

gogotu \$m[1]:
好像不太對喔,OG上有說:
B, the verb phrase that begins being the only eyewitness accounts modifies the subject of the preceding clause, suggesting nonsensically that the nephew of Pliny the Elder himself was the eyewitness accounts
這個也不難判定:
1. s v o, V-ing 則V-ing是形容S
2. s v o V-ing 則V-ing是形容O[/sup]



我了解OG上所說的,但我想問的是,選項(B)
(B)To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius可以看成modify letters嗎? 把他看成補充說明,修飾letters

可以嗎?若可以,則本題我會看成being指代不清,沒有正確選項清楚,且需省略,所以不好


看另外一個類似題OG253
253. Analysts blamed May's sluggish retail sales on unexciting merchandise as well as the weather, colder and
wetter than was usual in some regions. which slowed sales of barbecue grills and lawn furniture.
153
(A) colder and wetter than was usual in some regions, which slowed
(B) which was colder and wetter than usual in some regions, slowing
(C) since it was colder and wetter than usually in some regions, which slowed
(D) being colder and wetter than usually in some regions, slowing
(E) having been colder and wetter than was usual in some regions and slowed

ans:B

D.E也是類似選項,看OG的解釋

In D and E, the verb phrases (being colder ...,
having been colder . ..) do not refer as clearly to the noun weather as the pronoun which does.

由此看,我上面藍字的說法似乎是對的!
熱情優雅百分百的Janet
Janet
中級會員
中級會員
 
文章: 136
註冊時間: 2005-08-04 21:50


回到 GMAT Sentence Correction 考區

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 17 位訪客