Responding to the public's fascination with-and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.
a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may
a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to
astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will
astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may
题目分析:
本题的难度主要出现在选项(C)和选项(D)中。
选项分析:
选项A:划线部分身前的现在分词短语responding to the public's fascination with-and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids是伴随状语,其主语必须和它所修饰的句子主语相同,即,a scale。在逻辑上,“回应公众过分担心的”很显然应该是“天文学家”,而不是“量度表”。
选项B:伴随状语的逻辑主语错误同选项(A)。
选项C:本选项有两处错误。第一,a scale身后的定语应该由不定式短语to rate改为动名词短语for rating,这点考查了不定式和ing的区别。用之于本题,在主句“科学家研发了一个量度表”这个事件发生时,“给撞击地球的可能性打分”这个事件依然处于恒定的状态中。这是因为,当一个量度表被研发好了的时候,不一定要马上开始依照这个量度表来评分,可能只是一个参考标准,即,“打分”这个事件在主观上不一定发生,需要用ing形式。
第二,rate身后的宾语how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to collide with Earth是宾语从句,其核心词是从句中的谓语动词collide(撞击)。但在逻辑上,真正被“打分”的对象应该是小行星撞击地球的“可能性”而不是“撞击”这个事件本身(打出来的分,肯定是某一个或几个小行星撞击的百分比嘛)。因此,rate宾语的核心词应是likelihood。
选项D:Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。
选项E:likelihood的修饰部分,即,a particular asteroid or comet that may collide with Earth,的核心词为“一个特定的行星或彗星(a particular asteroid or comet)”。在逻辑上,应是“特定行星撞击的可能性”,而不是“特定行星的可能性”。因此,likelihood的修饰部分应用同位语从句。
C选项,”how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to“是宾语从句,从句的核心词是动词collide, 而实际上rate的对象自然不会是collide.
D选项,"for rating the likelihood"是scale的宾补,"that a particular asteroid or comet will"是同位语从句,用来修饰说明这个likelihood。语义正确合乎逻辑。
C和D还有to do和doing的区别:天文学家发明scale,但是rate这个动作未必由他们亲自完成,所以并没有强调施动者,故用doing而不是to do.
赞!
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论