扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2008E1-SC-178
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
题目分析：
本题考生需要看出划线部分身前的their compliance with laws是一个句子的名物化结果，原句为：
They comply with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets
选项分析：
A选项：saying身后的宾语从句that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles的主语的核心词是compliance，是一个单数名词，所以该宾语从句的谓语动词也应该是一个单数名词，即，protects。因此，本选项犯了主谓一致的错误。
B选项：Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。
C选项：主谓一致错误同(A)。
D选项：不定式短语to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets应改为现在分词短语requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets，这点考查了“不定式和ing的区别”，用之于本题，主句“遵纪守法”对“法律规定”的发生与否没有任何影响（你遵守还是不遵守法律，对法律本身规定了什么没有影响），因此只能用ing短语做定语修饰laws；主谓一致错误同(A)。请注意，这里的compliance with laws是comply with laws的名词化形式，所以由于不定式短语to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets是laws的定语，所以它的主句是comply（compliance）。
E选项：不定式短语错误同(D)。
不理解为什么最后要用进行时态
可否将with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets理解成成独立主格结构，插在了their compliance is protecting中间？
错误原因：没有搞懂句子在说什么
1) 后面应该是 saying that their compliance....is protecting turtles.首先就应该根据主谓一致排除A.C.D
2) compliance with laws后面是对其的描述，应该用v-ing做定语修饰(目的才用to)
3) is protectng : emphasize the action is ongoing in the present timeframe
主句法律的要求，不受遵不遵守法规的影响；
their compliance with laws+requiring =requiring修饰laws 表示法律要求
their compliance with laws+to require=表示法律的目的
protect的主语是compliance
摘抄D选项：主句“遵纪守法”对“法律规定”的发生与否没有任何影响，因此只能用ing短语做定语修饰laws
examples:
laws specifying long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> correct (___ing), since that's what the laws actually specify.
laws to specify long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> incorrect (that's not the ultimate purpose of the laws)
laws to discourage drunk driving --> correct (this IS actually the ultimate purpose of the laws)
"laws to require..." isn't a correct idiom if you're discussing the actual text of the laws themselves. if you were discussing the ultimate purpose of those laws, then this could be idiomatic.
谢谢你~
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
感觉前一条理解错了
the Congress passed a law requiring that husbands be more patient to their wifies to reduce the domestic violence.
ing 表示内容，to 表示目的
并不是their compliance with laws 可以有require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets这个结果，句意不对
遵守法律这一动作对法律内容本身不构成影响，因此不能用不定式。
从句的主语是compliance, 其后的谓语动词需要与主语一致。
这道题标记下来，还得再琢磨琢磨～
还是说their compliance with laws 这个遵守法律的动作保护了海龟？
想请问一下 compliance怎么发出protect这个动作? 因为不理解这个点 把B排除了
我的理解是：遵守法律的这个动作保护了海龟。
"Their compliance with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets"这个句子里，动词是comply with, requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets是定语，用来修饰law.
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
law to do
law V-ing
错选C，主谓一致
Their compliance with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets is protecting adult sea turtles中的"with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets"是否可以考慮為獨立主格修飾"protect"?
是否可以理解requiring是一个简化的定语从句？定的是law。
应该是不可以的，修饰的是compliance
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论