大家晚安,剛剛讀雜誌時,遇到幾句參透不出理路的語句,煩請高手解惑,謝謝~~
(1) In the south part of the park sits the new Olympic stadium. Built for sustainability, it contains less steel and concrete than most buildings its size, and its upper ring is made of surplus gas pipes.

Q1. 第一句【In the south part of the park sits the new Olympic stadium.】為什麼不寫成【The new Olympic stadium sits in the south part of the park.】,以語法解構和語意表述來說,應該是【新體育館座落於園區南方】比較通順吧??

Q2. 第二句【Built for sustainability, it contains less steel and concrete than most buildings its size, and its upper ring is made of surplus gas pipes.】,其中的【most buildings its size】是【most buildings which are as big as its size】的意思嗎?? 直接把【most buildings 】跟【its size】兩個具名詞地位的詞語連接在一起,且其中沒有連接詞、標點符號,這樣OK嗎???



(2) When some hear the word "Bedouin," they may think of mysterious desert nomads. Not long ago, this would have been correct.

Q1. 【this would have been correct.】要怎麼理解【would+完成式】這個時態的概念?? 寫成A【was correct】跟B【had been correct】不行嗎?? 就我自己的理解,作者應該是想說【在不久以前,這樣(去理解Bedouin)是正確的】,所以代表有一段時間,或者從古到過去的某一個時間點,這樣理解貝都因的方式是正確的。若是如此,為何不用過去完成式或者過去簡單式去描述??

以上,感謝各位幫我解惑><

共 11 則回應

2
第一題我也可以問你為什麼不寫在公園的南方有一座體育場。這沒什麼原因的

第二題 it's size 其實比較是形容詞, (跟他一樣大的) 形容+ (大部分建築物)名詞

第三題 would have been 同時也imply 現在不再是,不是純粹形容過去的東西
0
針對Q1,那是一種英語結構,叫Fronted Structure 或是直接叫Fronting,目的是為了focus and emphasis~ 就像中文也有倒裝句啊!
0
第一句是強調句型
0
卡位等問題二
0
B2 B3 都語言學的嗎 XD 那麼專業,我原本還想即使中文倒裝也是很自然的在用,現在想一想好想真有特別強調耶

我是B1
0
ㄧ是地方副詞倒裝成強調句
二 我要卡位等專業 我覺得most building it's size跟most building's size是一樣的意思
三是代表過去的事情有一個連續和完成性
0
(2)
前面"may" think of 做一般推測
在過去的推測用"would"
因為是一段時間所以用 have been

我不是英文系的,只是寫出我自己的理解~
求高人指點~
0
我是高中英文老師有教到類似句型
我自己極度不專業.....
0
Q1是強調語氣,已經了解

Q2 若【its size】是形容詞功用,那可否寫成【most its-size buildings】??
【its size】是所有格+名詞,所以有用【所有格+名詞】來修飾前方名詞的用法嗎??

Q3 如果would是帶有推測語氣的語句,則這邊的would是不是可以理解成像是might的功用??
B7 :【在過去的推測用"would"】,所以不能用might????
0
Q1:
我認為這跟筆者思維有關
他先"想到"公園才"想到"體育館 順勢用sit剛剛好
另外 你不覺得把stadium放在句末剛剛好可以接下一句的built for sustainability嗎?
Q2:
size of most buildings
Q3:
would've been correct, no longer correct
i guess it's fine you prefer "It was correct."
however you need to put accent on "was" to manifest the change,
which you can't do it without a tongue

personal opinions

"would've been =/= might've been"
the "would" way seems a lot more confident to me
it feels like you're not so sure about what you're saying while using might
0
第二題英該屬於推測語氣......既定用法,所以我自沒想過要去理解它(抹臉
不過,貼一個我自己曾經在準備大考的網站,解是推測語氣的部分,希望有幫助!!

馬上回應搶第 12 樓...
回應...