※ 引述《IP101 (101)》之銘言：
: 各位板大 小弟有個疑問 and also 放在一起連用會造
: 成意義重複產生錯誤嗎?
: 因為有些例題似乎錯誤 有些又可以用
: 有些分不太清楚
: 例如這題的A選項是錯誤
: Eating saltwater fish may significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks
: and also aid for sufferers of rheumatoid arthritis and asthma, according
: to three research studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
: (A) significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks and also aid for
: 但是下面這段卻又可以使用
: Turning away from literary realism to write romantic stories about the
: peasant life and landscape of northern Sweden, in 1909 Selma Lagerlof
: was the novelist who became the first woman and was also the first Swedish
: writer to win the Nobel Prize for Literature.
: 小弟估了一下 似乎是說and also 並不是正確性的錯誤 而是有效性的錯誤
: 如果其他選項都有明顯錯誤 那and also也是有可能正確
: 也就是說and also 是要看情形使用@@?
and also屬於冗長用法裡的重複句意，
通常在考試時，
冗長用法都會放置在平行對稱、固定搭配（慣用語）與句意原則之後才看。

Eating saltwater fish may [significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks
and also aid for] sufferers of rheumatoid arthritis and asthma, according to
three research studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

A) significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks and also aid for
原意是「顯著地(significantly)減少心臟病發作的風險
及（減少）對r.a.跟a.的患者的幫助」
是把名詞reduce（減少）跟aid（幫助，名詞時片語用for） 做平行。
可是推斷句意，常理下and連接的應該是兩件立場相近的事
這裡卻說「優點and also缺點」，應該用but表示轉折吧？

這才是這個選項的錯誤：錯誤平行使句意不合常理。
通常優先考慮到句意的不合理之後，and also我就不會再去看了
B)be significant in reducing the risk of heart attacks and aid for
錯誤同A
C)significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks and aid
直接將做及物動詞用的aid跟reduce (the risk)做平行，
表達兩件好事的列舉而非一好一壞的轉折，用and可以連接。
D)cause a significant reduction in the risk of heart attacks and aid to
cause a significant reduction不如C選項的significantly reduce簡潔（VAN）
E) significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks as well as aiding
違反平行原則。

而另一題則是因為其他選項都有排在冗長用法前優先考慮的強考點（明顯錯誤）
才會被排除。

A.句首開頭Ving修飾的邏輯主詞通常會緊接動詞擺在主句的最前方
B.C.E重心調換（主從變平行）

Dustin

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 1.162.19.99