大彭老师
大彭老师 - 英语老师
实名认证 专业认证

性别: 湖南 - 长沙 注册于 2021-12-24

擅长:英语教学

英语老师

求助 拜TA为师
254鲜花数
4725 经验值
14个粉丝
0个弟子
主页被访问 1127 次

最近动态

2022-05-18 15:28 回答问题

▲A of B 这种结构中,A的单复数是否需要根据B发生变化?答案是:不能一概而论,而视具体语境而定。比如:the father of the child 这个孩子的父亲(这个孩子只有一个父亲,所以father用单数)the father of the children 这些孩子的父亲(几具孩子可以共有一个父亲,因为他们是亲兄弟)the fathers of the children 这些孩子的父亲(多个孩子,多个父亲,这些不是亲兄弟,至少有些不是亲兄弟)▲再以 the proportion of 为例,指一种比例,用单数;用多种比例,用复数。如:The proportion of imports to exports is worrying the government. (D185) 出口与进口的比例正在令政府担忧。(“出口与进口的比例”是一种比例,所以用单数)The proportions of the room allowed us to put in a grand piano. (R405) 这个房间比例合适(其实是指面积够大)我们可以放一架大钢琴。(“房间的比例”包括“长与宽”的比例以及“长或宽与高”的比例,涉及不止一种比例,故用复数)▲再回到网友的句子:The proportion of aging population in X and Y is very high. 这里想表达x和y两个国家的老龄化人口都很高。这个句子表面上是指两个不同国家的老龄化人口比例,但由于 The proportion of 后面接的是 aging population,其后的 in X and Y 只是修饰 aging population 的定语,所以其实它还是指一种比例,所以不宜将 proportion 改为复数。

2022-05-18 13:08 回答问题

He spent hours _______ (seating/sat) with his friend under the bridge.我觉得用 seating 或 sat 都不合适,应该是 seated。

2022-05-10 14:06 回答问题

比较项不管是做主语、宾语还是表语都要省略,所以:正:More people came than we could accommodate.正:We invited more people than came.

2022-05-10 08:10 回答问题

下面引用《薄冰英语用法问答1144例》的一个相关问题的解答供你参考:

2022-05-04 23:11 回答问题

我觉得不宜加 what。因为这里 than seemed necessary 涉及形式主语和外置主语的省略:He spent longer on it than seemed necessary.= He spent longer on it than it seemed necessary that he should spend.= He spent longer on it than it seemed necessary for him to spend.另外,《牛津英语用法指南》也有类似提示:误:He worries more than it / what is necessary.正:He worries more than is necessary. 

2022-05-04 22:59 回答问题

对于网友的这个问题,我与前面两位老师的看法有所不同,但有些地方我也没有把握,提出来向大家请教!对于网友的句子,我的初步理解是(即同意网友的理解):The price was higher than he wished to pay.(正确用法)The price was higher than the price that he wished to pay.(是否符合语法值得怀疑) 网友的句子出自《剑桥英语语法》的p1121(可参考黄网友的截图),其标题是:Unexpected cases of upwards percolation 向上渗透的例外情况也就是说,此内容主要讲述一些向上渗透的“例外情况”,其中一种情况是比较项为名词的后置修饰语。例句如:They would have us face risks greater than President Kennedy’s most influential advisers seem disposed to face ___. He made tables of veins, nerves, and arteries five times more exact than ___ are described by any contemporary author. The gaps here require understood NPs, not AdjPs, since their functions are respectively object and subject: the comparative phrases must include risks and tables of veins, nerves, and arteries. Consider also the following, where the AdjP in the matrix is predicative rather than postpositive:《剑桥英语语法》认为这里的缺省的成分需要理解成名词短语,而不是形容词短语,因为它们的功能分别是宾语和主语,也就是比较短语必须包括risks和tables of veins, nerves, and arteries——注意作者认为这些都是“向上渗透的例外情况”,而非“错误情况”。 接着《剑桥英语语法》提出还要考虑以下情况,其中主句中的形容词短语是谓语而不是后置修饰语:This result is better than ___ would probably be achieved by a vaccination policy. The price was higher than he wished to pay ___.When children start school they tend to get books that aren’t as rewarding as they’ve had ___.The eastward movement of the Atlantic thermal ridge was forecast to be a little less than ___actually occurred.该书在这些例句下面给出的解释是:Again, the missing element from the comparative clause must be understood as an NP, not an AdjP: they are equivalent to “... than the result that would probably be achieved ...”, “... than the price that he wished to pay”, “... as the books they’ve had”, “... than the movement that actually occurred”. It is questionable whether such examples are frequent and systematic enough to qualify as grammatical; certainly the construction illustrated here is not generally permissible, as is evident from the clear ungrammaticality of *This candidate was much better qualified than they appointed (“than the one whom”), and the like.该段开头用了Again一词,表明它是承接上面一段而写的,上面一段提到“认为这里的缺省的成分需要理解成名词短语,而不是形容词短语”(这些是“向上渗透的例外情况”,而非“错误情况”),所以这里用Again表明,比较从句中缺缺的成分也必须理解为名词短语,而不能是形容词短语(这些也是“向上渗透的例外情况”,而非“错误情况”)。同时注意,这里用的是they are equivalent to(它们等价于),而不是“它们应改为”“符合语法的表达是”等,这表明作者是在用后面的例子对上面的句子作“解释”,即上面的句子等价于:“... than the result that would probably be achieved ...”“... than the price that he wished to pay”“... as the books they’ve had”“... than the movement that actually occurred”接着作者说“这样的例子是否使用足够频繁和足以构成体系以至被认为符合语法,这是值得怀疑的”,这里要理解的关键是 such examples 是指有 the price that 等的句子,还是指没有 the price that 等的句子,我们暂时不确定;接下来作者说的是 certainly the construction illustrated here is not generally permissible,这句话的关键信息 the construction illustrated here(这里用于解释的结构),用于解释的什么结构?我觉得就是指“the+名词+that”这种结构,也就是说,certainly the construction illustrated here is not generally permissible 的意思其实是指“这里用于解释的结构(the+名词+that)通常是不允许的”。但问题是作者在最后又来了一句:as is evident from the clear ungrammaticality of *This candidate was much better qualified than they appointed (“than the one whom”), and the like. 这可能是让人产生误解的主要原因,作者说“这从 *This candidate was much better qualified than they appointed (“than the one whom”)等句子的不合语法这一点可以看出”,这句话给人的感觉是,前面的 The price was higher than he wished to pay 等句子跟这个句子是一样的,是不符合语法的,但问题是:既然它们是一样的不符合语法,为什么后面这句加了星号,而前面的句子不加星号呢?既然是一样的不符合语法,那就应该都加上星号——这也是让我感到疑惑的地方(如何理解,向大家请教!)。我觉得后面这个句子之所以不符合语法是因为它是指人的,若改为指事物呢?它也不符合语法吗?《剑桥语法》认为不符合语法:This candidate was much better qualified than they appointed.请大家看看是否也不符合语法:This article was much better written than the teacher required. / This is a much better written article than I have read.

2022-04-26 20:38 关注了问题

2022-04-11 12:42 回答问题

书上的说法不算准确,根据L G. Alexander 的 Longman English Grammar,in case分句完全可以用 might 的。

2022-04-11 07:24 回答问题

查了好多词典,终于在商务印书馆翻译出版的这本《朗文英语写作活用词典  英汉双解》找到了原因。

2022-04-02 08:38 回答问题

你的句子中的 far 可以换成 much,也可以换成 a lot, a great deal 等:In many ways, life has become far more comfortable and convenient in the past few decades.=In many ways, life has become much more comfortable and convenient in the past few decades.=In many ways, life has become a lot more comfortable and convenient in the past few decades.=In many ways, life has become a great deal more comfortable and convenient in the past few decades.