[問題]OG-258

[ifly0218]

258. The British sociologist and activist Barbara Wootton once noted as a humorous example of income maldistribution that the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo was earning annually exactly what she then earned as director of adult education for London.

(A)that the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo was earning
(B)that the elephant, giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo, had been earning
(C)that there was an elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo, and it earned
(D)the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo and was earning
(E)the elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo and that it earned

ans.A

請問c為什麼錯,我看不懂og的解釋!謝謝!
(Choice C may be faulted for distortion of meaning and diminished clarity because it suggests that the point of Wootton's example was the elephant's very existence; comparative earnings are presented (after and) as incidental detail. )

[林小馬]

請問c為什麼錯,我看不懂og的解釋!謝謝!
(Choice C may be faulted for distortion of meaning and diminished clarity because it suggests that the point of Wootton's example was the elephant's very existence; comparative earnings are presented (after and) as incidental detail. )

把C帶進去如下,
The British sociologist and activist Barbara Wootton once noted as a humorous example of income maldistribution that there was an elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo, and it earned annually exactly what she then earned as director of adult education for London.

OG的解釋是說
用C帶進去,很容易就被解讀成整個句子分成以上紅藍兩部分
就會變成那個example只是
there was an elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo
而不包含earn的部分
earn的部分就變成下半句了
造成誤會
因為實際上,"這樣的大象賺很多錢"才是重點

不知道這樣寫可以看懂嗎
似乎寫得有點亂~~~~~~

[ifly0218]

好像有點懂了!
謝謝你的回覆!

[chencraig0227]

258. The British sociologist and activist Barbara Wootton once noted as a humorous example of income maldistribution that the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo was earning annually exactly what she then earned as director of adult education for London.

(A)that the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo was earning
(B)that the elephant, giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo, had been earning
(C)that there was an elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo, and it earned
(D)the elephant that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo and was earning
(E)the elephant giving rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo and that it earned

ans.A

請問c為什麼錯,我看不懂og的解釋!謝謝!
(Choice C may be faulted for distortion of meaning and diminished clarity because it suggests that the point of Wootton's example was the elephant's very existence; comparative earnings are presented (after and) as incidental detail. )

為啥正確A選項用過去進行式阿? 大象was earning 比 she earned?
這樣不是不一致嗎?

[dibert8]

BW 在倫敦當主任的時候,大象正在賺錢.
then:"那個時候".

[chencraig0227]

BW 在倫敦當主任的時候,大象正在賺錢.
then:"那個時候".

謝謝! 這樣明白多了!
不過還是對於過去進行式有些許不了解!
決定要不要過去進行式 看來是無法取巧
僅能靠句意決定了。

[cindychen47]

請問OG說
In B, the structure of noted... that the elephant, giving rides..., had been earning falsely implies that the reader already knows about the elephant—that is, that the existence of this particular elephant is not new information. Also, the past perfect had been improperly places the elephant’s earning in the past, prior to Wootton’s; consistent verb tense is needed to show that the actions are simultaneous.
用the elephant, giving...暗示讀者已經知道這大象...
是什麼意思啊?
我上CD看 一位NN-tianwan說 (我每次都會看成台灣 呵)
B的the elephant無限制性修飾成分，the只能特指前面的東西。A有限制性修飾成分that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo ，所以A沒有B的問題，A的the可以特指限制性定語從句所表示的物件。
我不是很懂他的意思ㄟ
可以幫我解釋一下嗎?
謝謝!謝謝!

[chencraig0227]

請問OG說
In B, the structure of noted... that the elephant, giving rides..., had been earning falsely implies that the reader already knows about the elephant—that is, that the existence of this particular elephant is not new information. Also, the past perfect had been improperly places the elephant’s earning in the past, prior to Wootton’s; consistent verb tense is needed to show that the actions are simultaneous.
用the elephant, giving...暗示讀者已經知道這大象...
是什麼意思啊?
我上CD看 一位NN-tianwan說 (我每次都會看成台灣 呵)
B的the elephant無限制性修飾成分，the只能特指前面的東西。A有限制性修飾成分that gave rides to children at the Whipsnade Zoo ，所以A沒有B的問題，A的the可以特指限制性定語從句所表示的物件。
我不是很懂他的意思ㄟ
可以幫我解釋一下嗎?
謝謝!謝謝!

大陸人老是喜歡咬文覺字!
其實就是在講有 定冠詞 the N ,表示要限定N
也就是要用that子句去特指那群gave ride的大象...

如果用B的", (which) giving..." 省略which,且加逗號表非限定..
就代表是"一堆gave ride大象中的其中一群gave ride大象" 非常詭異!

所以用the及句意都可看出要用限定用法。也就是關代前不加逗號...(A)

[cindychen47]

呵呵 謝謝你~~~回覆的真快
不像在CD那 問了都沒人理 >"<
帖子又一直沉下去
到後來我都懶的去問了
呵呵 還是謝謝你摟