協會論壇聚會時間地點須知

a sentence grammar

英文問題 (English Question)

版主: GraceKuo, Gracie, Benjamin Yeh, Harris1984, kevinliu, Happy Jan

a sentence grammar

文章kay » 週日 4月 02, 2006 11:34 pm

My English tercher corrected this sentence which I wrote "only when we emphasize on environment more than economy would improve global warming thoroughly ." into ''only when we emphsize the environment more than the economy will global warming improve . " I feel confused because why it should be writen to " will global warming improve " instead of "would improve global warming" ? and why it was corrected to "emphasize the environment" instead of " emphasize on the environment " ?
Thanks to anyone who answer my questions .
kay
 
文章: 2
註冊時間: 週日 2月 26, 2006 12:53 pm

文章Glotynn » 週一 4月 03, 2006 9:59 am

In your writing "only when we emphasize on environment more than economy would improve global warming thoroughly", there is no subject. You mistook "only when we emphasize on environment more than economy" as a subject; in fact, it is an adverbial clause.

Instead, "global warming" should be converted into the subject of the main clause, because in any sentence beginning with "only when...", the main clause can be inverted (主詞動詞倒裝). So your teacher's corrected version "Only when we emphasize the environment more than the economy will global warming improve" is perfect. Moreover, your teacher deleted the word "thoroughly" because it was too risky to fit a logical meaning.
Glotynn
 
文章: 57
註冊時間: 週五 3月 31, 2006 11:12 am

文章euphorian » 週一 4月 03, 2006 11:58 am

Glotynn 寫:In your writing "only when we emphasize on environment more than economy would improve global warming thoroughly", there is no subject. You mistook "only when we emphasize on environment more than economy" as a subject; in fact, it is an adverbial clause.

Instead, "global warming" should be converted into the subject of the main clause, because in any sentence beginning with "only when...", the main clause can be inverted (主詞動詞倒裝). So your teacher's corrected version "Only when we emphasize the environment more than the economy will global warming improve" is perfect. Moreover, your teacher deleted the word "thoroughly" because it was too risky to fit a logical meaning.


I hate it when there is no simple and easy explanation.
In the name of forum tranquillity, feel free to delete any of my post, sooner the better.
頭像
euphorian
 
文章: 158
註冊時間: 週一 10月 31, 2005 11:51 am
來自: The Loneliest Planet

文章Happy Jan » 週一 4月 03, 2006 1:46 pm

euphorian 寫: I hate it when there is no simple and easy explanation.


On this forum, we only discuss English questions. So, please be polite and NOT to be emotional.
Thanks a lot. :lol:
快樂英文讀書會 Happy English Club 為中高階的英文讀書會,定期在台北/桃園/新竹/台中/台南/高雄聚會.主要是由一群年輕上班族組成,快樂英文讀書會成員來自各行各業菁英,與會來賓必須具備英文會話能力,全程用英文輕鬆閒聊以及討論具有深度的議題各一個小時.歡迎蒞臨快樂英語讀書會.
頭像
Happy Jan
協會(創會)理事長
 
文章: 1516
註冊時間: 週五 10月 28, 2005 5:28 am
來自: 桃園市

thanks

文章kay » 週一 4月 03, 2006 1:53 pm

I get it , and thank you very much ,dear Glotynn .
kay
 
文章: 2
註冊時間: 週日 2月 26, 2006 12:53 pm

文章euphorian » 週一 4月 03, 2006 3:17 pm

Happy 寫:
euphorian 寫: I hate it when there is no simple and easy explanation.


On this forum, we only discuss English questions. So, please be polite and NOT to be emotional.
Thanks a lot. :lol:


Perhaps you are not too familiar with this sort of expression. Don't read into what I wrote too literally. It's neither emotional nor impolite. It was meant to convey the irony of the situation. :wink: Perhaps, from now on, I should just stick with the basics.

"Words are very... unnecessary, they can only do harm"
~by Depeche Mode
In the name of forum tranquillity, feel free to delete any of my post, sooner the better.
頭像
euphorian
 
文章: 158
註冊時間: 週一 10月 31, 2005 11:51 am
來自: The Loneliest Planet

文章Happy Jan » 週一 4月 03, 2006 6:17 pm

euphorian 寫:
Happy 寫:
euphorian 寫: I hate it when there is no simple and easy explanation.


On this forum, we only discuss English questions. So, please be polite and NOT to be emotional.
Thanks a lot. :lol:


Perhaps you are not too familiar with this sort of expression. Don't read into what I wrote too literally. It's neither emotional nor impolite. It was meant to convey the irony of the situation. :wink:

Yeah. Got it :lol:



euphorian 寫:Perhaps, from now on, I should just stick with the basics.

This is a forum, which accepts varieties of personal styles.
This is a forum, which provides us a colorful interactive platform for English discussion.
Just do it. Be yourself. :lol:
快樂英文讀書會 Happy English Club 為中高階的英文讀書會,定期在台北/桃園/新竹/台中/台南/高雄聚會.主要是由一群年輕上班族組成,快樂英文讀書會成員來自各行各業菁英,與會來賓必須具備英文會話能力,全程用英文輕鬆閒聊以及討論具有深度的議題各一個小時.歡迎蒞臨快樂英語讀書會.
頭像
Happy Jan
協會(創會)理事長
 
文章: 1516
註冊時間: 週五 10月 28, 2005 5:28 am
來自: 桃園市

文章euphorian » 週二 4月 04, 2006 11:02 am

That was a way to use the word "hate" in its most lighthearted sense.
Here is another example:
"Snobbish grammarian is somebody we all love to hate"
In the name of forum tranquillity, feel free to delete any of my post, sooner the better.
頭像
euphorian
 
文章: 158
註冊時間: 週一 10月 31, 2005 11:51 am
來自: The Loneliest Planet


回到 英文問題 (English Question)

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 14 位訪客

cron