同意曾老师的解答,即此句为否定转移。关于that从句中should的理解,我觉得按照推测性用法理解更为合理。即should在此表示说话人对事件发生的可能性进行的推测。A:their parents should fight again.B: their parents should not fight any more.1 should按照责任、义务意义理解:A:他们的父母应该再打架。B:他们的父母...
回答于 1秒前
badly可以是方式副词,也可以是程度副词。在修饰动词want,need时为程度副词,程度副词通常置于及物动词的宾语之后,want/need something badly. 当need作为名词用在in need of something的结构时,badly修饰的是介词短语in need. 副词修饰介词短语应该置于介词之前。因此,badly的正确位置应该是:The building is badly in...
回答于 1秒前
故事的上下文是这样的:“Fancy seeing you here, Professor McGonagall.” He turned to smile at the tabby, but it had gone. Instead he was smiling at a rather severe-looking woman who was wearing square glasses exactly the shape of the markings the cat had had around its eyes. She, too, was wearing a clo...
回答于 1秒前
所有的静态动词都是延续性的,都是非终结性的,这是不言而喻的。因此所谓终结性或非终结性延续性动词都是针对动态动词而言的。静态动词表示状态的存在,动态动词表示事件的发生。非终结性延续性动词表示的事件称为活动(activities),主语可以是人,也可以是无生命的事物。这类动词通常为不及物动词。例如:It is raining....
回答于 1秒前
ruiqiang网友用一下你的逻辑思维。既然struggle是不及物动词,那么就不应该有宾语。不定式可以作宾语也可以做目的状语。既然struggle不需要宾语,那么不定式就应该是目的状语。逻辑上,为了speak,主语得克服一系列困难(struggle),这也是合理的。经常这样去思维、分析。你的很多问题其实根本就没有必要去问别人的。
回答于 1秒前
The most obvious casualties would be purveyors of fossil fuels, minerals, agricultural produce and other primary materials, the demand for which would suffer.the demand for which would suffer为非限制性定语从句,关系代词which指代先行词fossil fuels, minerals, agricultural produce and other primary mat...
回答于 1秒前
形容词短语作状语,表示主语的状态:GM公司依赖于韩国的电池。但现在即将从中国购买很多电池。这种转折关系说明形容词短语是让步状语。可以理解为形容词前省略了系词be的现在分词being.
回答于 1秒前
We can only speculate... but it stands to reason that...已经明确告诉你这是现在对过去的情况进行推测。你的其它理解是正确的。
回答于 1秒前