A Harvard anthropologist has proposed that using fire to cook food could be dated back to almost two million years and that it could explain hominid features like having a large brain and small teeth.
using fire to cook food could be dated back to almost two million years and that it could explain hominid features like having
the use of fire to cook food could date back almost two million years and could explain such hominid features as
cooking food with fire could date back to almost two million years, explaining hominid features like
fire used to cook food could date back almost two million years, explaining hominid features such as having
fire used for cooking food could be dated back to almost two million years and explain hominid features like
题目分析:
略。
选项分析:
选项A:动名词短语using fire to cook food需改为名词短语the use of fire to cook food,这点考查了名词和动名词的区别。用之于本题,可以被追溯到两百万年以前只能是“用火做饭”这个事件,一个事件自然有内置的时间终点(饭熟且吃上饭了,用火做饭这个事件就结束了)。请注意,有些时候,use fire to cook food在表示“属性”的时候,是没有时间终点的,例如:
Q:What is your task everyday?
A:My task is using fire to cook food.
一个人每天的工作肯定是一个属性,属性显然没有时间终点。
选项B:Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。有些同学可能会认为date back应该用被动语态,因为“用火做饭”这件事只能“被”追溯,而不是主动发成追溯这个动作。但这是不正确的。在英语中,有一族的动词学名叫“中动词”,这些动词的特点就是,主动和被动表达近乎相同的意思,例如:
The door is opened.
The door opens.
这两句话都讲的是“门开了”。open就是一个典型的中动词,它的主动语态和被动语态意思相同。还有很多例如read, increase, decline, cut等均是中动词。本题中的date back to,也和上述原理相同, 是典型的中动词,主动和被动同意。
选项C:动名词短语cooking food with fire需改为名词短语the use of fire to cook food,这点错误同选项(A)。另外,分词短语explaining hominid features是be dated back的伴随状语,其需要被改为普通的合句。“可以被追溯到什么年份”和“可以解释什么特点”是一件事两个不同方面的属性,应该用合句来表示两者并列,而不能用伴随状语。伴随状语表达的是主从关系,即,两个事件之间有因果或者强弱的关系。
选项D:be date back主语是fire used to cook food,其核心词为fire(used to cook food是过去分词短语,做fire的定语)。在逻辑上,“火”本身并不能被追溯到两百万年以前,只能是“用火做饭”这件事。另外,伴随状语explaining hominid features应该改成合句,错误同选项(C)。
选项E:主语的核心词错误同选项(D)。
A. like后加名词,错
B. 是the use of fire可以explain hominid features,另外date back+时间段,date back to+时间点,正确
C. 不是date back这件事explain,而是”use of fire“ explain,错误
DE. 主语是fire,变成了“fire” could date back,错误
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论