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。
这道题我判断suggest 是evidence的宾补,所以要看found的约束力,found只是发现,约束力弱,所以选了从句,然后就错了。。
请问老师怎么区分宾补还是定语、状语?
同样也有这个问题...毕老师的语法书里写道“现在分词做宾补,谓语动词必须是感官动词如see hear smell等”,不知道仅凭此点是否能完全解释此处,老师能补充下吗
是的。分词短语做宾补的现象,只能是当谓语动词是感官动词的时候。所以这道题目里的ing并不是宾补。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论