使用comma+ing的条件: 1) it should apply most nearly to the subject of the preceding clause; and, even more importantly, 2) it should have one of the following RELATIONSHIPS to that clause: * immediate consequence * simultaneous, but lower-priority, action
使用comma+ing的条件: 1) it should apply most nearly to the subject of the preceding clause; and, even more importantly, 2) it should have one of the following RELATIONSHIPS to that clause: * immediate consequence * simultaneous, but lower-priority, action reducing可修饰ancestors也可修饰event,有歧义 感觉CD不够简洁
COMMA+verbING 也可以修饰主句,但是从句意分析,reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation是明显修饰an event的!
——相当于,in other word,scientist believes that A,——that B at前面需要that,使破折号前后从句平行,错 reducing逻辑主语为ancestor 不合理,错
如果用A那就是ancestors做出reduce的动作了,语义不对。B是event做出reduce这个动作,语义合理,留着。
——相当于,in other word,scientist believes that A,——that B at前面需要that,使破折号前后从句平行,错 reducing逻辑主语为ancestor 不合理,错
——相当于,in other word,scientist believes that A,——that B at前面需要that,使破折号前后从句平行,错 reducing逻辑主语为ancestor 不合理,错
使用comma+ing的条件: 1) it should apply most nearly to the subject of the preceding clause修饰他紧前面的这个句子; and, even more importantly, 2) it should have one of the following RELATIONSHIPS to that clause: * immediate consequence *前一个句子的结果 simultaneous同时发生, but lower-priority优先级较低, action reduing修饰模糊,逻辑意义上应该是event 导致reduce。。但是这里“comma+ing"修饰主句主语ancestors,所以错误。
reduing修饰模糊,逻辑意义上应该是event 导致reduce。。但是这里“comma+ing"修饰主句主语ancestors,所以错误。如果reducing 前面无逗号,则可以修饰event.
greatly 修饰前面的从句,而不是修饰event,修饰event表意更好
reducing 发出者是句子主语ancestor,错
逗号后的ing不能就近修饰,逻辑主语只能是主句的主语,所以就说不通了,祖先减少他们的数量?。。
readUCing 主句的主语
把网站装进口袋
随时随地练习