Re: [文法] 文法題
※ 引述《hopeliu (阿翔)》之銘言：
: Joe: When traffic fatalities and injuries are considered, this intersection is
: the most dangerous in the city. However I need to pass by it for work everyday.
: It has been three weeks since I __________ an accident.
: (a) will seen
: (b) saw
: (c) has see
: (d) have seen
: 答案b，
: 要怎麼解釋d是錯的？
: 感謝各位大大。
It has been three weeks since I have seen an accident.
後面用現在完成,在於"I have seen an accident"這個事件(我看到車禍)是可能會
在重覆發生.
依題目來看這叉路口很危險,因為常發生交通意外,所以看到交通意外是很能再
度發生. 用現在完成,合情合理.
是你妹的疑問? 就先不管是不是國中題,因為d沒有錯,實在不應該解釋它是錯的,
不應該抹滅你妹搞不好她真的對語文很有天份, d答案頂多就先不解釋.
等她學多一點之後再解釋.
你可以去請教教語法學高段一點的母語人士教授討論是不是這樣的差異.
※ 編輯: tijj 來自: 17.9.10.1 (12/03 13:03)
好吧,省去你問的時間.
The Grammar of the English Tense System: A Comprehensive Analysis pp 263
Renaat Declerck, Susan Reed, Bert Cappelle
It's been three weeks since I have heard from him.
It's been a long time since I have had a decent meal.
The head clause, which can also make use of the present tense (It's three
weeks...), is clearly duration-qualifying. The since-clause receives an
indefinite reading: it is concerned with question whether a situation has
actualized in a period up to now.
It is interesting to note that a condition for the use of the present
perfect in the since- clause is that the situation referred to
is potentially repeatable..
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
※ 編輯: tijj 來自: 17.9.10.1 (12/03 14:43)
推
12/03 14:59, , 1F
12/03 14:59, 1F
→
12/03 15:00, , 2F
12/03 15:00, 2F
→
12/03 15:01, , 3F
12/03 15:01, 3F
→
12/03 15:02, , 4F
12/03 15:02, 4F
推
12/03 15:03, , 5F
12/03 15:03, 5F
→
12/03 15:03, , 6F
12/03 15:03, 6F
→
12/03 15:05, , 7F
12/03 15:05, 7F
→
12/03 15:06, , 8F
12/03 15:06, 8F
→
12/03 15:07, , 9F
12/03 15:07, 9F
推
12/03 15:12, , 10F
12/03 15:12, 10F
→
12/03 15:12, , 11F
12/03 15:12, 11F
→
12/03 15:13, , 12F
12/03 15:13, 12F
no problem. That's a good question. :)
→
12/03 15:14, , 13F
12/03 15:14, 13F
pp 264
It's (been) five years since I {saw / *have seen} him on the 20th
anniversary of his marriage.
如上例
顯然就是要用saw,因為語意告訴我們20周年慶不可能重覆發生.
(當然, 在此我們排除他再婚的可能)
原題目,比如誇張點,
我們並不知道Joe是不是今天重病/傷,快掛了,或明天決定要換路線,
用saw或許可能是style問題或者不夠精準. 但d不能說是錯. d反而還更好.
※ 編輯: tijj 來自: 17.9.10.1 (12/03 15:45)
→
12/03 16:00, , 14F
12/03 16:00, 14F
→
12/03 16:01, , 15F
12/03 16:01, 15F
→
12/03 23:26, , 16F
12/03 23:26, 16F
→
12/03 23:26, , 17F
12/03 23:26, 17F
→
12/03 23:27, , 18F
12/03 23:27, 18F
→
12/03 23:27, , 19F
12/03 23:27, 19F
→
12/04 00:36, , 20F
12/04 00:36, 20F
→
12/04 00:37, , 21F
12/04 00:37, 21F
→
12/04 00:37, , 22F
12/04 00:37, 22F
→
12/04 00:38, , 23F
12/04 00:38, 23F
→
12/04 00:39, , 24F
12/04 00:39, 24F
→
12/04 00:40, , 25F
12/04 00:40, 25F
→
12/04 00:40, , 26F
12/04 00:40, 26F
推
12/04 01:01, , 27F
12/04 01:01, 27F
→
12/04 01:02, , 28F
12/04 01:02, 28F
→
12/04 14:23, , 29F
12/04 14:23, 29F
※ 編輯: tijj 來自: 220.135.3.163 (12/07 20:04)
→
09/07 00:11, , 30F
09/07 00:11, 30F
→
12/02 18:27, , 31F
12/02 18:27, 31F
→
04/13 22:45,
6年前
, 32F
04/13 22:45, 32F
討論串 (同標題文章)