Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving as a kind of snorkel.
that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolving
that has suggested the elephant descended from an aquatic animal, its trunk originally evolving
suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved
题目分析:
略。
选项分析:
A选项:and是连词,应该连接两个句子。本选项and身后缺少谓语动词。
另外,本选项整个划线部分是evidence的定语从句,这个定语从句应该改为不定式短语。这点考查了“不定式和从句的区别”。用之于本题,主句“澳大利亚胚胎学家发现证据”这件事会直接影响“证据能表明大象的进化史”这件事的发生与否(如果不发现证据,证据自然什么都无法证明)。
B选项:定语从句错误同(A)。
C选项:本选项也是evidence的定语,是一个现在分词短语。这点考查了“不定式和ing的区别”。同理于选项(A),本题中evidence的定语必须是不定式形式。另外,had descended是过去完成时,表示某一个在过去的过去发生的事件。由于证据表明的是“客观真理”,不是某一个事件,所以应该过一般现在时而非过去完成时。
D选项:“大象来自于水生动物”是一个客观存在的事实,所以应该用一般现在时而不是过去完成时。(该错误同选项(C))
E选项:Correct. 本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。
E选项,[to suggest XXX] 这部分可以理解为found evidence的宾语补足语,那么suggest的动作发出者就是evidence;同时也可以理解为Australian embryologists have found的状语吧?那动作的发出者就是学者们了。请问这种情况怎么区分呢?会觉得选项有歧义。
如果仅就语法形式来说的话,确实句末的to do可以是定语也可以是目的状语。但是,咱们看句子的时候,肯定是既要看结构,也要看意思。意思和结构是一个相互制约关系,没有结构,意思无法表现,没有意思,结构全是歧义。所以,对于这道题目来说,由于我们通过意思可以看出,一定是证据suggest,所以to do肯定是定语。
在GMAT考试中,通过歧义而排除的选项,还是很少的。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论