Primary among the arguments against uniforms is their lack of variety and the consequent loss of individuality experienced by people who must wear them.
不是很理解experienced这个非谓语是作定语还是状语并且修饰谁?
还有这个非谓语experienced是被动形式意为被遭受吗?
我的理解是:非谓语的被动形式作状语,验证的话我就还原成状语从句来更好的理解这句话的意思,由句子逻辑意思分析状语从句的主语应该是前面主句的宾语才能翻译通顺而不是前面主句主语,也就是还原成When their lack of variety and the consequent loss of individuality is experienced by people who must wear them. 如果改成主动语态是when people who must wear them experience their lack of variety and the consequent loss of individuality
不知道我的分析对不对,还是一开始就分析错了不是非谓语作状语?
我记得高中老师说非谓语作状语他的逻辑主语(也就是相关名词)是主句的主语,并且非谓语动词作状语的标志应该有“逗号”,这句话experienced前并没有逗号,而且我还原成状语从句认为主句宾语是从句主语,也就默认非谓语的相关名词或说逻辑主语是主句的宾语了,和高中老师说的有逗号标志和逻辑主语是主句主语有出入,所以我分析错了吗?
可是我找到当年老师笔记例句when Li Ming came in, Li Ming saw me(李明一开始在外面,我在里面),从这句话看,因为主句主语和从句主语一样,所以舍去从句主语而有了非谓语 coming in, Li Ming saw me.故得出结论:非谓语作状语其逻辑主语是主句主语和一定有逗号这两个结论,可是现在我深想如果换成when I came in, Li Ming saw me(我一开始在外面,李明在里面)该怎么改成非谓语作状语且没有歧义呢?如果也写成 coming in (我也是主动进来啊), Li Ming saw me(我一开始在外面,李明在里面)这不和when Li Ming came in, Li Ming saw me(李明一开始在外面,我在里面)改成非谓语作状语一样了?这怎么区分啊,怎么改才没有歧义呢?谢谢老师