關於英文句子用法問題。?

Question

The man sued the company (which) he had worked at saying that they had dismissed him illegally.  
請問知識大大們，句中的"saying"是當此句的另一個主詞(動名詞當主詞)對嗎？
如果saying是當另一個主詞，再請問，關係子句後面which he had worked at，可以直接再接另一個名詞嗎？謝謝。: )
不好意思，第一次看到這種句型，如果有認知錯誤，還請見諒。也請知識大大們不吝提點，謝謝。: )

AhShing · Accepted Answer

The man sued the company [(which/that) he had worked at] saying that they had dismissed him illegally.  
[關係子句] 是修飾 "company"，以下例句不再重複。

首先你要明白"sue"(控告)這動詞，其後面一般會配搭一個原因或理由。
可以用下列四種句法去表達:
1. 介詞 "for"
    The man sued the company for illegal dismissal.
2. 連接詞 "because"
    The man sued the company because they had dismissed him illegally.
3. 分詞構句 (副詞片語 ~ adverb phrase for reason):
    The man sued the company having been dismissed illegally.
或 Having been dismissed illegally, the man sued the company.
4. 將原因陳述(用say, claim, allege等動詞)，然後變成分詞片語:
    The man sued the company alleging that they had dismissed him illegally.

結論: 也就是說, "saying"是分詞，而不是當此句的另一個主詞(動名詞當主詞)!

**回應你的問題....省略的關代應該是"that"?
My mistake, 其實關代which和that也可用於帶介词的defining子句上, 致歉!

Jenkin · Answer

不對：

saying是連接the man sued控告的內容，
主句：其實可以從報導角度寫
The man sued XXX company saying that ....

但要注明XXX company是這人的受僱公司，所以(which...)是加插先指明這公司跟這人的關係："which he has worked at"這子句是附加形容。

因此這子句不能接另一主句，因為主句是他"提出控告"這的行動

TOMING88 · Answer

The man sued the Co.----s+v
saying that they had dismissed him illegally=(HK UA cinema dismissed Him1985 illegally told and said by TVB Co HK.) is noun clause with verbal noun "saying" as a gerund-----o
that he had worked@ is an adj.cl---not two subjects to "man"

prisoner26535 · Answer

阿欣與堅坑大大都解釋得很對.而我只是想要知道:

1. 為神海倫王認為saying是當另一個主詞?

> 是因為看到動名詞，所以沒想清楚就認為它是當另一個主詞Orz

saying後面有受詞(名詞子句)所以也不會是動名詞.

2. 海倫王認為這句話的意思是什麼(中語翻譯)?

> 這句中文，我的翻譯是:那名男士控告他曾任職的公司違法解僱他。

所以你認為saying在這裡是神摸意思呢?

關於英文句子用法問題。?

4 個解答