[問題]GWD10-Q20

[peche]

请問一下 D 中的 "overcome" 在這裡是啥種形式出現?

birds overcome by pollution routinely fell

是 "birds that overcame by...."嗎?

謝謝大家的幫忙~

[stilalala]

请問一下 D 中的 "overcome" 在這裡是啥種形式出現?

birds overcome by pollution routinely fell

是 "birds that overcame by...."嗎?

謝謝大家的幫忙~

birds (which were overcome by pollution ) fell from ...

很清楚的說明就是這些被ｏｖｅｒｃｏｍｅ　的鳥掉下來

請指教

[vivid]

D.birds overcome by pollutioin routinely fell from the sky above LA freeways,prompting officials in California to devise a plan to reduce
-----------------------------------------------------------------
請問這裡的routinely fell from the sky 會不會錯誤修飾到pollution

[stilalala]

D.birds overcome by pollutioin routinely fell from the sky above LA freeways,prompting officials in California to devise a plan to reduce
-----------------------------------------------------------------
請問這裡的routinely fell from the sky 會不會錯誤修飾到pollution

我想是不會的
因為birds 是主詞, overcome by pollution 是修飾birds的
所以 fell 這個動詞一定是修飾主詞的

敬請指教

[Kennethy]

這題我對ABC有疑惑,因為原題有since當因為,可是答案D沒有since,會不會改變句意

請各位大大詳解 THX

[hcgh]

這題我對ABC有疑惑,因為原題有since當因為,可是答案D沒有since,會不會改變句意

請各位大大詳解 THX

上一頁9樓Janet文章裡有解釋喔..

[whoops]

In the mid-1970's, since birds were overcome by pollution, and routinely falling from the sky above Los Angeles freeways, this prompted officials in California to devise a plan that reduced automobile emissions.

C. birds had been overcome by pollution and routinely fell from the sky above Los Angeles freeways, prompting officials in California to devise a plan that reduced

個人覺得(C)可能的問題應該是在had been overcome 上面

過去完成是表一個在過去先發生的動作

但是在原文上看不出有什麼先後關係

但是不是錯在 had been overcome[過完].....and fell[過簡]

還是錯在had been overcome and (had) fell 後面缺少過去簡單式

我就不知道了

還請NN指教

C選項可以解釋為 birds had been overcome by pollution (先) and routinely fell from the sky above Los Angeles freeways(後)嗎?
鳥先被overcome了所以才fell from sky
在時間先後順序上這樣的說法可以解釋的通嗎?

[vera1010]

C選項可以解釋為 birds had been overcome by pollution (先) and routinely fell from the sky above Los Angeles freeways(後)嗎?
鳥先被overcome了所以才fell from sky
在時間先後順序上這樣的說法可以解釋的通嗎?[/quote]

單就以上句子的grammar來說應該解釋的通,不過就整個句意來解釋還是覺得D來的比較妥當

1.overcome用過去完成式,時态錯誤 有改變句意之嫌

2.officials in California to devise a plan 應該表目的性而非 提出已經減少排氣的計畫,所以 to reduce 又比that reduced來的好...

想了很久還是比較同意D ><!!! 請指教!!!