作者scju (QQ)
看板Eng-Class
标题[文法] that we imagine were thought的结构？
时间Fri Aug 5 22:20:06 2016
direct speech
When we report people's words, thoughts, beliefs etc, we can give the exact
words (more or less) that were said, or that we imagine were thought. This
kind of structure is called 'direct speech' (though it is used for reporting
thoughts as well as speech).
----------
大家好，想请问上述这句话：
we can give the exact words (more or less) that were said, or that we imagine
were thought.
第一个形容词子句that were said→能理解
第二个形容词子句that we imagine were thought→不懂
我的理解是
that代替the exact words
若是
we can give the exact words (more or less) that were thought→此时that当主词
或
we can give the exact words (more or less) that we imagine→此时that当受词
怎麽会that we imagine were thought？
还是说，可以把we imagine理解成是「补充说明」，想成这样：
we can give the exact words (more or less) that (we imagine) were thought.
请问各位了，谢谢！
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 114.32.32.215
※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/Eng-Class/M.1470406808.A.D72.html
※ 编辑: scju (114.32.32.215), 08/05/2016 23:38:07
1F：→ dunchee: ".... 成是「补充说明」，..." -> Yes 08/05 23:45
3F：→ dunchee: Quirk的文法书有"尝试"用更精确/细部的文法标签去归类/解 08/05 23:45
4F：→ dunchee: 释(pushdown ...-element: 一个子句里头又包一个子句的变 08/05 23:46
5F：→ dunchee: 化现象)。只是单纯想要理解这用法/意思的话，前者"quick 08/05 23:46
6F：→ dunchee: and dirty tips"讲的就够了 08/05 23:46
D大你好，我看不太懂那网页举的例子@@
例如：
He is the man who Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe is Sir Fragalot.
就算把中间视为补充说明好了，省略後成为：
He is the man who is Sir Fragalot.
文法是没错，但这样的句子意义在哪里？
何不直接写成这样就好：He is Sir Fragalot.
而且原例子似乎改成这样更好：
That he is the man who Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe is Sir Fragalot.
---
我猜想，无论是
we can give the exact words (more or less) that we imagine were thought.
或
He is the man who Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe is Sir Fragalot.
都似乎是一种「取巧」的写法，也就是那个that和who既可解释成後面动词的受词，
也可解释成後面BE动词的主词，这样就可以用最节省的字数，一次表达两种意思。
但应该这不是正规写法吧，学习者会跟我一样有疑惑QQ
※ 编辑: scju (114.32.32.215), 08/06/2016 00:35:17
7F：→ kaifrankwind: 囧...不要太习惯把省略当作分析文法的工具啊 08/06 00:54
8F：→ kaifrankwind: 网页那句重点就在於说明是Peter等人认为是Sir Fraga 08/06 00:55
9F：→ kaifrankwind: lot的 你把这边去掉了当然看不出意义啊 08/06 00:56
10F：→ kaifrankwind: (应该说 省略前要想过哪些地方是必要传达的资讯) 08/06 01:04
11F：推 Tenka: 月经文 类似问题问到烂了 都是看不懂更不知道去哪找答案 08/06 01:09
12F：→ kaifrankwind: 够正规了 08/06 01:10
13F：→ Tenka: 「取巧」的不是写法 而是用「补充方法」去理解这种句子 08/06 01:11
14F：→ Tenka: Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe (that) the man 08/06 01:12
15F：→ Tenka: is Sir Fragalot. 今天要强调 the man 改写一下就变上面的 08/06 01:13
16F：→ Tenka: 你把the man往前移 believe就跟is碰在一起 08/06 01:15
17F：→ Tenka: 看不懂的人就傻眼 "阿一个句子怎麽会有两个动词" 08/06 01:16
这真的是已经问到烂的问题吗@@
若按照T大的说法，那第一句该怎麽解释呢？
第二句用我前面的想法，也就是名词子句的方式来写，应该比较好懂吧：
That He is the man who Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe is Sir Fragalot.
不过第一句好像就没办法用这样的方式改写，意思会不对。
※ 编辑: scju (1.169.70.234), 08/06/2016 19:10:16
18F：推 vincentman: 一、二句还是用补充说明较容易懂;第二句改用That子句 08/06 19:43
19F：→ vincentman: 感觉语意有点怪，而且较正确文法要将who改成whom 08/06 19:45
20F：→ gentianpan: 纯粹是 that were said, or that were thought. 中间 08/06 21:26
21F：→ gentianpan: 差个 we imagine 来区分报导「想法」与「说」 差在想 08/06 21:26
22F：→ gentianpan: 法可能是 we imagine 的。 08/06 21:26
23F：→ gentianpan: 我又错字了: 插入 insert 08/06 21:27
24F：推 Tenka: 都告诉你怎麽来的 你还是坚信你想的 那还要讲什麽 对牛弹琴 08/06 22:39
25F：→ Tenka: 1.we can give the exact words. 08/06 22:41
26F：→ Tenka: 2.we imagine (that) the words were thought. 08/06 22:42
27F：→ Tenka: 把两句并成一句就是原始的句子 08/06 22:43
T大火气不小喔，连「对牛弹琴」说出口了，呵呵：
1.并不只是我，上述至少有三位推文者都认为这类句子当「补充说明」来解释较好。
独排众议的可是您喔——。
2.如果照您的解释来看，
we imagine (that) the words were thought.
後半部和前一句重复的元素是the words，可充当关系代名词，再加以改成形容词子句。
对此我有个新想法：
换个角度思考其实可发现，the words were thought本身就是结构完整的子句，
而「we imagine」这个部分反倒可以视为是「外加上去补充句意」的主要子句，
因此，
we can give the exact words.
we imagine (that) the words were thought.
合并为一句後，「we imagine」依然作为补充句意所用，
也就是我们前面讲半天的「补充说明」。
不正殊途同归吗？
(关键在於，由重复元素the words改写而来的关系代名词that得作为两句的衔接，
所以要前移，紧邻至先行词the exact words後面，因此就跑到we imagine前面，
也就容易让人混淆了。)
※ 编辑: scju (1.169.70.234), 08/07/2016 01:09:26
28F：→ PPmYeah: 插入语 end 08/07 01:20
29F：→ kaifrankwind: 第二句头你加了that，整句变成只是个名词子句。没人 08/07 13:53
30F：→ kaifrankwind: 这样表达的 08/07 13:53
K大你好
第二句我原本要表达的概念是这样：
[That he is the man who Peter, Paul, and Mary heartily believe]
is Sir Fragalot.
也就是 名词子句+V+C 的形式
不过算了^^
感谢版上先进们的解说，我已理解这类句子其实是由名词子句改写而成的形容词子句，
所以前面会多一个原本那个名词子句前面的主要子句，
而那个主要子句可视为名词子句的补充说明。
※ 编辑: scju (1.169.70.234), 08/07/2016 15:25:45