求助：关于分词修饰谁的问题

gmatmba

新东方好像说分词修饰的是逻辑主语，但是我看到了好多反例，比如说：
大全
25.       A recent study of ancient clay deposits hasprovided new evidence supporting the theory of global forest fires ignitedby a meteorite impact that contributed to the extinction of the dinosaursand many other creatures some 65 million years ago.

(A) supporting the theory of globalforest fires ignited by a meteorite impact that

(B) supporting the theory thatglobal forest fires ignited by a meteorite impact

(C) that supports the theory ofglobal forest fires that were ignited by a meteorite impact and that

(D) in support of the theory thatglobal forest fires were ignited by a meteorite impact and that（B）

(E) of support for the theory of ameteorite impact that ignited global forest fires and
选B，这里的supporting就是就近修饰evidence的，但contributed修饰global forest fire的。

请问，现在分词和过去分词引导的结构到底是就近修饰还是修饰逻辑主语？或者干脆就是两个都行？如果两个都行的话优先修饰哪个？

哪位NN能帮忙总结下？先谢谢了

hangtianyuan

首先，必须要对分词的作用进行理解

你问的问题，分词即可以做后置定语，也可以做状语，我只帮你列出-ing分词了……建议你可以看看BY

-ing分词：

1）做状语：-ing分词短语作状语时一般放在句首或句尾

Five fledgling sea eagles left their nests in western Scotland this summer, bringing to 34 the number of wild birds successfully raised since transplants from Norway
began in 1975.  （PREP1SC1-30）
这个题目就是现在分词作伴随状语，伴随left这个动作发生。（注意伴随状语出现在主谓宾结构中，而不是主系表）
2）做定语：-ing分词作定语时，它所修饰的次一般是分词所表示的行为或状态的主体，从逻辑上看，似乎是一种主语和谓语的关系
A recent study of ancient clay deposits hasprovided new evidence supporting the theory of global forest fires ignitedby a meteorite impact that contributed to the extinction of the dinosaursand many other creatures some 65 million years ago.      （这个就是一个最好的例子）
3）其他还可以做主语、宾语、补语，但是GMAT里不常见，唯一常见的就是做主语时的谓语动词用单数


逻辑主语的判断：        
1）表伴随动作、状态、功能，与句子谓语动作同时发生，逻辑主语等于句子主语                                                            
2）表伴随结果，整个句子是原因，导致分词动作产生，无逻辑主语

gmatmba

太谢谢你的总结了！语法都已经忘光了...

linglingdan

请问一下，B项中的that引导的是定语从句吗？怎么没有谓语动词呢？我认为ignited应该是分词修饰fire表示被动，而不是动词；而后面的contributed应该是动词，主语是meteorite impact（窃以为这里如果是个定语从句更好）。有没有高人能给解惑一下，万分感谢！

hangtianyuan

请问一下，B项中的that引导的是定语从句吗？怎么没有谓语动词呢？我认为ignited应该是分词修饰fire表示被动 ...
linglingdan 发表于 2010-4-20 21:28

    A recent study of ancient clay deposits has provided new evidence supporting the theory that  global forest fires ignited by a meteorite impact contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs and many other creatures some 65 million years ago.

以上是B选项的正确句子。主语是A recent study of ancient clay deposits，谓语动词是has provided，宾语是new evidence.  

supporting...现在分词作后置定语，修饰evedence，里面包括一个同位语从句theory that...，这个同位语从句的主语是global forest fires，谓语动词是contributed to...，ignited by a meteorite impact，过去分词作后置定语修饰fires

gmatmba

哦，明白了，最近给定语从句弄晕头了，看什么都像定语从句，结果把同位语从句都给忘了，谢谢你的指点

taohuaxian

105. (Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully
coordinating them with her narratives,) capitalized on
her keen observation and love of the natural world.
(A) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully
coordinating them with her narratives,
(B) In her book illustrations, carefully coordinating
them with her narratives, Beatrix Potter
(C) In her book illustrations, which she carefully
coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix Potter
(D) Carefully coordinated with her narratives, Beatrix
Potter, in her book illustrations   
(E) Beatrix Potter, in her book illustrations, carefully
coordinated them with her narratives and
那么请问这道题，此题的B的解释：B： Phrase carefully coordinating … illogically
modifies the noun that immediately
precedes it: book illustrations; Potter, not the illustrations, did the coordinating.此处的分词不是修饰的主语么？为什么修饰了前面的illustrations. 希望xdjm帮忙解惑！

painsper

新东方好像说分词修饰的是逻辑主语，但是我看到了好多反例，比如说：
大全
25.       A recent study of  ...
gmatmba 发表于 2010-4-19 07:23

    这一题还想再请教，B是正确答案我同意！
但是，我觉得D还有一种理解，应该也是可以的呀！就是…… in support of the theory that global forest fires were ignited by a meteorite impact and that （global forest fires ） contributed to the extinction of the dinosaursand many other creatures some 65 million years ago.
.
没记错的话，在gmat语法里，并列句中若并列的两个句子主语相同，则可以省略一个。这一题，and 后的that理解成theory的定语即the theory that contributed to……肯定不符合逻辑意义，但如果把that看成theory的同位语，并且省略与前面并列的相同主语，也就是前面说的global forest fires ， in support of the theory that global forest fires were ignited by a meteorite impact and that （global forest fires ） contributed to the extinction of the dinosaursand many other creatures some 65 million years ago.
这样虽然是不如B简洁，但无论从语法还是意思上来讲，不都也是可以成立的吗？
我是不是钻到哪个牛角尖去了！！迫切期待解答！！

yoyo561116

If using "that" to lead the rest, the fire should be parallel to the theory, which is illogical according to the original meaning of this sentence.