大疑惑、大疑惑!!!逢此这岁末年终,索性让疑惑大扫除一下~
分词构句,由于能够节省重复的主词,也就得以让行文更精简,
但是,却不可因小失大而导致句子的意思模糊不清,甚至引发文法错误,对吧?
大疑惑的问题来了。以下述例句为探讨对象,该如何是好?
中文要表达某人脚一滑摔到海里挂了,活了 72岁。
表示原因、条件,以及先发生的句子里有需要两边平行的对等连接词 and,
这两句在动词的差别分别为 drown、suffocate,都有淹死的意思:
Someone slipped into and drowned in the sea.
Someone slipped into and suffocated in the sea.
表示结果的句子:
Someone died at age 72.
大疑惑来了,请教各位以下哪一句文法正确并且表达清楚?
这里需要吹毛求疵的疑惑在于,
若是改成 drowning、suffocating,或是 being drowned、being suffocated,
好比在 and 对等连接之下,
slippering、being drowned,或是 slippering、being suffocated,
算是能够彼此对等而可以共同存在吗?
顺便一问关于介系词的疑惑。slip into,这个 into 一定要加上吗?
去掉 into,slipped and drowned in the sea 是否文法不够工整?
总之,以下哪一句优胜呢?优胜的原因能否具体说明与分析一下以解决大疑惑。
在此先献上最高的感谢喔!!!
drown:
Slippering into and drowning in the sea, someone died at age 72.
Slippering into and being drowned in the sea, someone died at age 72.
suffocate:
Slippering into and suffocating in the sea, someone died at age 72.
Slippering into and being suffocated in the sea, someone died at age 72.