扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2012-SC-72
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly a result from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period
that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly a result from increasing
that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing
题目分析：
本题虽然属于难题，但是考点较为容易识别，属于常考题型。
选项分析：
A选项：虽然suffer和from是固定搭配，但是本选项中from身后dwindling food supplies的核心词是错误的。在逻辑上，suffer from身后的内容应该是suffer的原因。本题中海床生物受灾的原因应是“食物供给的变坏”，而不是“食物供给”。试想，只有供给变坏，才能导致受灾，而食物供给本身是中性的，不会导致生物受灾。另外，动名词短语increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period需改为名词短语an increase in sea surface temperatures during the same period，这点考查了名词和动名词的区别，用之于本题，increase这个动作的时间已经被状语 during the same period规定了发生时间段，因此increase必然有时间终止点。
B选项：Correct.本选项在语法和逻辑上均是正确的。possibly as a result of an increase是food supplies were dwindling的状语。
C选项：because of身后的核心词为food supplies，本选项错误同(A)。动名词短语increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period错误同(A)。
D选项：reveal的宾语 creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling的核心词为creatures of the seabed，一个对食物供给的研究应该揭示的是海床生物的某种情况而不是单纯的一个生物。
E选项：本选项错误同(D)；动名词短语increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period错误同(A)。
我觉得A中from increasing sea surface temperatures应该是核心词错误吧？和dwindling food supplies核心词错误一样。逻辑上原因应该是海平面温度的升高而不是海平面温度，increasing做定语修饰sea surface temperatures
懂了为啥要加that 不急that就不是一种情况而是变成了一种单纯的生物
A：有三处错误。
1 possibly resultiing from increasing,作结果状语，因而可以指前句主语，就是 a study.因此造成逻辑错误。
2 suffer from后面接名词，而不接动名词。 suffer from a decline of food supplies 就可以。
3，是由于温度的增加造成食物的减少，所以， an increase 要比increasing ,更体现出时间的先后以及结果。
B：正确。 be suffering是指正在经历不好的事，或者变糟了。 as a result of 纠正了A中 ing形式作状语回指主语的逻辑歧义，且用 a increase in 使得表达更准确。
A没有 possibly resultiing from increasing这句话啊
dwindling 是做形容词修饰food supplies 啊
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
老师，我觉得A最大的问题是，a result from，这是个同位语，但是它的身前没有可以修饰，限定的名词或代词。
A：海床生物受灾的原因应是“食物供给的变坏”，而不是“食物供给”。试想，只有供给变坏，才能导致受灾，而食物供给本身是中性的，不会导致生物受灾。
【划重点】
...but its meaning clashes fundamentally with the usage of comma + __ing.
if something results from 'X', then 'X' happens FIRST.
in the structure 'sentence + , + __ing...', the modifier NEVER describes something that happens before the main sentence.【续】
A: if you see comma + 'resulting from', you can eliminate it.
you can have it as an adjective modifier, without a comma - as in the following sentence:
the flooding resulting from the abnormally strong storms had left six inches of standing water in the street.
note that the boldface is an adjective modifier, modifying 'flooding'.
B/C: the modifier difference required a meaning difference in the main body of the sentence. Choice (B) reads "creatures..were suffering because food supplies were dwindling," a logical statement, and close to the meaning in the original sentence. Choice (C) reads "creatures..were suffering because of food supplies." Choice (C) is less logical--the creatures were suffering because they had food supplies? or because there was something wrong with the food supplies they had?
1/in the structure 'sentence + , + __ing...', the modifier NEVER describes something that happens before the main sentence.
2/'(possibly) as a result of', like other prepositional phrases that follow commas, serves to modify the action of the preceding clause (i.e., were dwindling). this is totally standard usage, so make sure you know it.
不过，我还是没有理解为什么suffering from后面不能接dwindling food supplies，翻译成中文感觉又是对的？
——“因减少的食物供给而痛苦”
为什么A不对呢？
because of 与 because后面的核心词不同
逻辑轮元