作者scju (QQ)
看板Eng-Class
標題[文法] as和than後面的重複比較點是否要刪除？
時間Fri Sep 15 12:16:30 2017
大家好，請教一下
在Practical English Usage 3rd寫道：
177.7 comparative structures with 'as' and 'than'
說明：We can leave out words after 'as' and 'than', if the meaning is clear.
例句：
The weather isn't as good as last year. (= as it was last year.)
I found more blackberries than you. (= than you found.)
（請注意，這裡用的是「等號」）
--------
581 'than' and 'as' as subjects, objects and complements
說明：subjects: more than is necessary; as happened
例句：
He worries more than is necessary. (NOT ... more than it/what is necessary.)
The train might be late, as happened yesterday. (NOT ... as it happened
yesterday.)
（請注意，這裡明確說出了「NOT」）
--------
所以我就不太懂，為何同樣是as、than的比較結構，有時候主詞可以選擇要不要保留，
有時候卻又非刪除不可？不曉得關鍵點在哪裡呢？
特別是這兩句：
The weather isn't as good as last year. (= as it was last year.)
He worries more than is necessary. (NOT ... more than it/what is necessary.)
這兩個it應該都和前面代指的事情重複，為何一個可以保留，一個一定要刪除？
謝謝！
PS 此篇有同步貼在英語論壇，若有回應，會將內容張貼過來，和大家一起討論。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 36.226.129.251
※ 文章網址: https://webptt.com/m.aspx?n=bbs/Eng-Class/M.1505448992.A.FAC.html
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 12:25:33
1F：推 NCUking: He worries more than [it] is necessary. 09/15 13:15
2F：→ NCUking: 這樣會很奇怪 it 指得是什麼呢？ 09/15 13:16
3F：推 NCUking: The weather isn't as good as it was last year. 09/15 13:20
4F：→ NCUking: 這句it很清楚就是the weather 09/15 13:20
5F：→ sunny1991225: to worry? (給個猜測 09/15 13:22
6F：→ sunny1991225: 雖然我都是直接把這類比較"不公式化"的比較級用記的 09/15 13:23
7F：→ sunny1991225: 了... 09/15 13:23
8F：→ sunny1991225: 話說在more than is necessary這種例子裡，就算可以 09/15 13:29
9F：→ sunny1991225: 勉強塞一個東西當作你覺得缺掉的"it"，這還是跟一般 09/15 13:29
10F：→ sunny1991225: 的比較級不太像。一般比較級能夠建立的前提是你有某 09/15 13:30
11F：→ sunny1991225: 種兩個對象共有的性質(high、tall、fat...)可以比較 09/15 13:30
12F：→ sunny1991225: ，但這裡的worries more的more如果是副詞的話，應該 09/15 13:31
13F：→ sunny1991225: 是指頻率 09/15 13:31
14F：→ sunny1991225: 我想都想不到後半的句子有哪個部分會有這個特性 09/15 13:32
He worries more than [it] is necessary.
我覺得這個it可以指He worries這件事情。
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 13:42:16
15F：→ sunny1991225: scju:我的意思是，你回去看看the weather isn't as 09/15 13:51
16F：→ sunny1991225: good as it was這句 09/15 13:52
17F：→ sunny1991225: 那邊他們在比較的對象很清楚，就是good這個性質 09/15 13:52
18F：→ sunny1991225: (放到整句話就是在說天氣好壞的特性 09/15 13:52
19F：→ sunny1991225: 但是如果真的是還原成你寫的那個句子，這個more看起 09/15 13:53
20F：→ sunny1991225: 來不會像the weather那一句一樣是一個比較級前後的 09/15 13:54
21F：→ sunny1991225: 語句中的物件都有的特性 09/15 13:54
22F：→ sunny1991225: 前面那句話的more如果是副詞，意思會是他煩惱的頻率 09/15 13:56
23F：→ sunny1991225: 或程度很高，這個副詞有辦法套到後半的句子上做比較 09/15 13:57
24F：→ sunny1991225: 嗎? 09/15 13:57
所以sunny你的意思是說，雖然底下這兩句都是「比較」的結構，但其實是不太一樣？
The weather isn't as good as it was.
He worries more than is necessary.
----
但是我有一個假設：
He worries more than [it] is necessary.
這句的it就是因為是重複的比較點，所以被省略掉了。
如同這裡說的
https://i.imgur.com/PgO2vIb.jpg
既然如此，為何這句
The weather isn't as good as it was.
'it'也是重複的比較點，卻可以選擇不用省略呢？
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 14:26:17
25F：→ sunny1991225: 你搞錯我的意思了。我的意思是一般比較級在比較的 09/15 14:28
26F：→ sunny1991225: 是adj或者adv的強度 09/15 14:28
27F：→ sunny1991225: 這預設了前後兩句話都可以套用那個特定的adj或adv 09/15 14:29
28F：→ sunny1991225: 像是在He is taller than you are (tall)這種句子 09/15 14:30
29F：→ sunny1991225: 我們在比較的其實不是兩個人，而是兩個人的身高 09/15 14:30
30F：→ sunny1991225: 但在He worries more than is necessary.這個句子上 09/15 14:31
31F：→ sunny1991225: 我看不太出來這裡的more(如果是指擔心的頻率)怎麼樣 09/15 14:31
32F：→ sunny1991225: 可以套到後半的is necessary上 09/15 14:32
33F：→ sunny1991225: 所以雖然這是一個固定用法，我卻覺得它很難用一般的 09/15 14:32
34F：→ sunny1991225: 比較級公式去看待 09/15 14:33
你的意思是說，
He worries more than is necessary.
這句和一般的比較級不一樣，無法用「重複的比較點應該省略」的方式去理解？
（因為它根本沒有「重複的比較點」）
那這樣的話，你會如果理解這句話的架構呢？尤其是
...than is necessary 這部分。
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 14:38:52
35F：→ sunny1991225: 如果要硬要解(雖然我是建議直接記用法就好了...) 09/15 14:51
36F：→ sunny1991225: 或許這裡的more其實不是副詞，而是more things的省 09/15 14:52
37F：→ sunny1991225: 略。不過這個解法我也找不到證據支持... 09/15 14:52
38F：→ sunny1991225: (就變成he worries more things than he worries 09/15 14:54
39F：→ sunny1991225: what is necessary.) 09/15 14:54
40F：→ sunny1991225: 翻了一下手邊的書才想到，你把more當代名詞的話 09/15 15:26
41F：→ sunny1991225: 其實國內有些人(像賴世雄)會把這裡的than叫做準關係 09/15 15:26
42F：→ sunny1991225: 代名詞。但這個解釋方式是不是國外也接受，我是有點 09/15 15:27
43F：→ sunny1991225: 懷疑 09/15 15:27
44F：→ sunny1991225: 賴世雄自己書裡的意思有點像是這樣： 09/15 15:27
45F：→ sunny1991225: I have more money than is needed. 09/15 15:28
46F：→ sunny1991225: 賴說這裡的than其實可以被看作than the money which 09/15 15:29
47F：→ sunny1991225: 這個理解方式套到你問的句子，就變成底下這樣: 09/15 15:29
48F：→ sunny1991225: He worries more (things) than (he worries) the 09/15 15:31
49F：→ sunny1991225: things which is necessary. 09/15 15:32
50F：→ sunny1991225: (還是強調，這是賴世雄自己的解釋方式，他並沒有說 09/15 15:36
51F：→ sunny1991225: 國外有人這樣講 09/15 15:36
感謝！
還想請問一下，如果在比較架構裡頭，真的有「重複的比較點必須刪除」這項規則，
那麼這個例句就應該有問題才是：
The weather isn't as good as last year. (= as it was last year.)
因為it就是指前面的The weather，應該不能寫成
The weather isn't as good as it was last year.
所以實際上到底能不能這樣寫呢？
還是說並沒有「重複的比較點必須刪除」這種強制規則？
謝謝。
補充英語論壇的回覆
https://goo.gl/RHnmPs
---
我問：
In this sentence:
The weather isn't as good as last year. (= as it was last year.)
'it' can be omitted or not.
But in this sentence:
He worries more than is necessary. (NOT ... more than it/what is necessary.)
'it' must be omitted.
Why?
網友Mister Micawber 回應：
Not 'must be'—'what' is just more awkward because less used than 'it' is in
'as it was last year'.
我再問：
You mean these are grammatically correct?
He worries more than it is necessary.
He worries more than what is necessary.
他回應：
Yes, that does not really offend me; it is just, as I say, awkward.
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 17:18:15
52F：→ sunny1991225: 我不覺得那是"錯"的，只是語言有它的習慣 09/15 17:26
53F：→ sunny1991225: 那位網友說的awkward大概就是Michael Swan為什麼會 09/15 17:28
54F：→ sunny1991225: 建議這麼做。Swan並不是說它是grammatically wrong, 09/15 17:28
55F：→ sunny1991225: 而是人們會聽不懂你想表達的意思 09/15 17:28
56F：→ sunny1991225: 像是上面賴世雄提供的那種拆解方式(把than當作某種 09/15 17:30
57F：→ sunny1991225: 類似relative pronoun的東西)或許比較方便你理解這 09/15 17:30
58F：→ sunny1991225: 句話，但外國人即使沒有用準關代這種解釋方式，也都 09/15 17:30
59F：→ sunny1991225: 知道這種句子怎麼用 09/15 17:30
感謝回應！
換句話說，底下這兩句都是對的，那也就說，「重複的比較點必須刪除」未必都是真的？
The weather isn't as good as last year.
The weather isn't as good as it was last year.
※ 編輯: scju (36.226.129.251), 09/15/2017 19:25:10