用 what 开头句子,暗示“未知的、意外的事情”,所以,两句都用 to。这里,to 表示“对象关系;针对关系”。happen with 表示“某事与......有牵连;某事涉及到...而发生;某事随着...而发生” 之意。不强调意外。
回答于 1秒前
The greater the population there is in a locality, the greater the need there is for water, transportation,and disposal of refuse.——这是个错句,多写了两个 the(红色的多余,必须删去)。改为:The greater population there is in a locality, the greater need there is for water, transportation,and disposa...
回答于 1秒前
I'm deeply skeptical of efforts that naively believe you can simply accumulate more data and that will do the job.efforts 是先行词,后面接了两个并列的定语从句,由and 连接:that naively believe you can simply accumulate more data that will do the job两个 that 都是关系代词,在从句中主语。【...
回答于 1秒前
their translation and transformation into moments of significance为了理解这种名词结构,我们用动词表示,作定语的 their 指前文的 objects and images,转换为动词时,用 them :translate and transform them into moments of significance (把它们转化成有意义的时刻)【翻译】布景师的工作显然包括对物...
回答于 1秒前
1 这里that指代version?①His version will later be cross-checked against that of the university. 之后会对他的说法与校方的说法进行多方核对。 2 set在这里怎么理解,是什么意思,是不是短语set by连用。that指代pattern?②His release turned out to follow the pattern set by that of the other six hostages....
回答于 1秒前
Thames Islands 应该翻译为:泰晤士河群岛。1. Islands 是复数,故译为“群岛”; 2. 这些小岛就在泰晤士河上,所以,名称要体现出“岛屿的归属”。下面这段文字讲的很清楚:Eyots and Aits — Thames Islands,by Miranda Vickers. The Thames has many islands. Miranda has undertaken a review of all of them. S...
回答于 1秒前
Joe and Lisa are on holiday in Japan.They've been to Japan once before.This is the second time they've been to Janpan.这三句话放在一起说,那么第三句就意味着“还在日本度假”。第一句决定了说话时的语境:“现仍在日本”。如果没有第一句,那么,第三句意味着他们已经回国了。
回答于 1秒前
When we got to the accident, everyone was confused because there was nobody there to supervise.【翻译】当我们到达事故现场时,大家都很困惑,因为那里没有人监督。supervise:监督; 管理; 指导。通常是及物动词接宾语,但在本句是不及物动词,作nobody 的定语。nobody 与其为主谓关系。
回答于 1秒前
They sank down sorrowing, without waiting for it to come in words. 是的。sorrowing 是现在分词,作“方式或伴随状语”。sink down 指因疲劳或悲伤“无力地坐下”。
回答于 1秒前
These weapons are menaces to world peace.【翻译】这些武器是对世界和平的威胁。看翻译便知:to 表示“对象关系、针对关系”。这种关系可以是褒义的,也可以是贬义的。即好处或坏处都有可能。就本句而言,是“坏处、危害、威胁”。如果把 to 改为 of ,那就成了“所属关系”,逻辑允许吗?我们说,“武器” 是“威胁”,世界和平自...
回答于 1秒前