�H�� 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 8 年前


1. The king's duty was ____ over his country to the best of his ability.

中間為什麼要填 to reign 為什麼不是reigns

2. This book is also ____ with recipes for delicious cakes and pies.

為什麼中間是填 loaded 為什麼不是loads

3. Steps were taken ____ the damaged building so that it would not fall down

為什麼中間是填 to stabilize 不是 stabilized?




thanks for your help~

but I can not understand the question of 3.... could you explain again...very appreciate.

2 個已更新項目:

Did you mean I should ignore the word of "were taken"??

2 個解答

  • 8 年前

    For your 3 questions, I like to give you a general idea what you face. The problem you have is the BE verb. The regular verb follows after BE verb can have 3 possible situations:

    1. BE + to V ( your question #1)

    it means: 表示職責、義務、意圖、約定、可能性等, 預定(做)...;

    應該(做)...,必須(做) ...;會(做)...;要能(做)...

    2. BE + V-ing

    it means present progress tense (現在進行式 )

    3. BE + P.P. (past participle, 過去分詞) (your questions #2 and #3)

    it means passive tense (被動式), or passive voice (被動句)

    As for question #3, besides the passive voice "were taken", it also wants to follow with another verb, so to avoid two verbs in the sentence, it uses "to stabilize"

    2012-09-26 21:42:26 補充:

    master Dark Helmet! Thank you for the suggestion!

    2012-09-27 12:39:20 補充:

    Did you mean I should ignore the word of "were taken"??

    No, it is part of the sentence and cannot be removed. What I tried to tell you is:

    2012-09-27 12:43:50 補充:

    Q#3 belongs to the case #3 I have listed. However, besides "were taken", it also has another verb "stabilize". To make the sentence grammatically correct, you need to use "to" between "were taken" and "stabilize" as

    were taken to stabilize...

    it means "被拿來穩定..."

    2012-09-27 12:45:07 補充:

    if you don't have "to" between them as:

    were taken stabilize

    it is grammatical incorrect, because it has TWO verbs side by side.

    參考資料: self
  • 8 年前

    (X) follow with

    (O) be followed by