Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.
at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers
that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers
that some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced,
some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced
some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,
题目分析:
破折号是一个很神奇的符号,身后的内容既可以修饰一个词,也可以修饰一个句子。在本题中,破折号身后加上用that引导的从句或者省略这个that都是可以接受的。
选项分析:
A选项:reducing their numbers是伴随状语,其逻辑主语应该为其所修饰的句子的主语,即,our ancestors suffered an event的主语。但在逻辑上,下降祖先数量的应该是事件,而不是祖先本身。
B选项:Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。
C选项:so that their numbers were greatly reduced是结果状语从句,但其是被动语态。我们可以认为其在语义上约等于:
某人或某物下降了我们祖先的数量。
联系语境则有:
我们的祖先遭受到了一个事件,如此以至于,某人或某物下降了我们祖先的数量。
划线的两句话之间没有了因果关系。(肯定应该是,遭受事件,如此以至于,这件事下降了数量)
另外,划线部分身后的and thus our genetic variation需要和并列连词and身前的内容屏行,即,reduce their numbers and thus our genetic variation。
D选项:本选项中定语从句补全为:
their numbers were greatly reduced from an event.
这是不合逻辑的,例如:
(1) 在中国,这有一辆车。(In China, there is a car.)
(2) 中国有一辆车。(China has a car)
两个例句的意思是完全不同的。句(1)中,我们无法确定这辆车是否属于中国所有,例如这辆车的主人是个美国人,他把车放在了中国境内,但你不能说,这辆车就是中国的。用之于本题,必须是这个事件下降了祖先的数量。否则不能说祖先们suffer了这个事件。
E选项:so as to身后的动词的主语必须是其主句的主语。在本选项中是our ancestors。但在逻辑上,下降了祖先数量的应该是“事件(an event)”,而不是祖先自己。另外,引导词that应该放在sometime in the past身前。
请问这里可以把破折号省略么,后面的句子加that直接做同位语从句。
破折号……身后加上用that引导的从句或者省略这个that都是可以接受的。
根据平行,sth reduce the numbers and genetic variation,排除CD。
【*A选项】,“, reducing”如果是做伴随的话,逻辑主语是ancestors,不合逻辑。→ 所以“, reducing”作定语修饰event。→ 有逗号,是非限制性定语。非限制性定语的作用是解释说明,限制性定语才可以分类。→ 所以改成限制性定语将event分类才对。
但其实根本还没有到区分“名词定语的限制性”就中招了……看到分词的时候要根据逻辑主语区分伴随状语和定语!
老师,这里的“at some time” 和 "some time" 也可以作为判断依据吗?
不可以。这就好像,我们可以说,last year,但也可以说in last year(虽然不常见)一样。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
1. choice (A) there is a problem with modification. (A) is implying that our ancestors greatly reduced their own numbers (this is incorrect because it was the event that greatly reduced ancestors).
2. that (in C) and so as (in E) imply PURPOSE. The result is a strange meaning: that our ancestors suffered for the PURPOSE of reducing their numbers.
Not the intended meaning. Eliminate C and E.
这个题目用新方法论,完全get不到,内涵外延应该不是,措辞也不对,也不像是动词论元。
考点都写在题目的右侧了,多明显的对于各种动词的逻辑主语的考查啊。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
不好意思我是语法盲。我看了限定性定于和非限定性定语的解释还是不懂,难道把逗号去掉就是限制性的了吗?还是说分词短语只能做非限定性定语?
限定和非限定的区别,就在于逗号。用逗号和先行词隔开了,就是非限;没有隔开,就是限定性。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
破折号是一个很神奇的符号,身后的内容既可以修饰一个词,也可以修饰一个句子。在本题中,破折号身后加上用that引导的从句或者省略这个that都是可以接受的。
实义成分缺失。
so as to是连词,其身后的动词的主语必须是其主句的主语。
这里可以从平行和标点符号来看,number和varity的下降是平行的,所以and不需要用逗号隔开,加平行。
还有平行
对啦,实意缺失,逻辑论元,现在分词与动词的区别