阿蓉仔 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 6 年前

請問after before之後可以直接加過去分詞嗎?

after, before之後可以加 V-ing

但是我認為不可以加p.p.

因為+ V-ing時的after before為介係詞

正因為它有介係詞的詞性

所以也不能將after,before+ p.p.視為保留連接詞的分詞構句

而應該說after, before + being + p.p.

請問以上我的論點正確嗎?

如果是,麻煩幫我尋找有力的證據,如字典或外國網站出處等

我目前手邊資料都查不到相關的說明

我的同事都認為after, before+ p.p.是正確的

姑且不論文法,我就是沒聽過別人這麼說啊...

Please help. Thanks!

已更新項目:

各位,我剛剛找到LionEnglish大大的回答了

他說牛津英文法指南裡面有說,但我沒有這本書無從查證

歡迎大家再討論

https://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?q...

5 個解答

評分
  • Louis
    Lv 7
    6 年前
    最佳解答

    after/before+ p.p是錯誤的。因為介系詞後面的字是其受詞,應用代名詞或名詞性質的字或片語。p.p.不能當名詞用,所以不可能拿來當介系詞的受詞。

    I'll die before giving in. =我寧死不屈。giving in是「動名詞片語」。

    Knock at the door before entering the room.後面的entering the room也是動名詞片語。before entering the room是用來修飾述部的「介系詞片語」,屬副詞性能。

    同理,Wash you hands after touching raw meat.裡的touching是動名詞。

    Barlow was arrested 24 hours after arriving back in Britain.裡的arriving也是動名詞。動名詞有「完成式」:having ~ed,但因為after已經表明了先後,就簡單式就可以了。

    2014-03-28 16:26:45 補充:

    《新觀念英文法》p.405

    quoted

    介系詞的受詞具有名詞性質,可以是名詞、代名詞、名詞片語或名詞子句等相當於名詞的字詞,而(介系詞+受詞)構成的介系詞片語則主要當形容詞片語或副詞片語使用。

    除了名詞或代名詞之外,其他詞類或字詞有時也會與介系詞一起使用,但這是特殊的狀況,通常我們可以將介系詞後面的部分視為名詞化的表現。

    unquoted

    2014-03-28 16:30:35 補充:

    Please do as asked!

    = Please do as you were asked!

    這裡的as是「連接詞」,不是「介系詞」。

    2014-03-28 16:45:29 補充:

    I took it for granted.

    這裡的granted應視為名詞化的表現。

    an En

    What do you take me for?

    To hear him speak English, one would take him for an Englishman.

    to take xxx for yyy =把xxx認成yyy

    所以xxx與yyy 的詞性是相當的

    i took it for granted.裡的過去分詞是當名詞在用。

    2014-03-28 16:49:00 補充:

    After watched the Journey, mommy said she wanna go to Hawii.

    應寫成After watching ...或 Having watched ...

    He knows which song of Ariana is playing after listened to the first beat.

    同理,應寫成...after listening ...

    He felt nervous about HIV after had sex without condom.

    應寫成...after having sex ...

    2014-03-28 17:03:18 補充:

    If someone in authority grants you something, or if something is granted to you, you are allowed to have it.

    所以 I took it for granted.= I took it for something that is granted to me.

    granted是在當介系詞的受詞,在當名詞用。

    2014-03-28 21:26:30 補充:

    http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/search/e...

    After winning the prize she became famous overnight.

    2014-03-28 21:34:04 補充:

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/before

    They would die before surrendering.

    2014-03-28 21:45:14 補充:

    《牛津英語用法指南》p.130

    quoted

    在正式的文體中,常用before ...ing這種結構。

    Please put out all lights before leaving the office.

    離開辦公室之前請關燈。

    Before beginning the book, she spent five years on research.

    在動手寫這本書之前,她花了五年時間進行研究。

    unquoted

    2014-03-28 21:46:10 補充:

    《牛津英語用法指南》p.41

    quoted

    after ...ing

    在正式文體中,常用after +~ing這一結構。也可以用after having +過去分詞,談論往事時,尤其如此。

    After completing this form, give it to the secretary.

    (比After having completed ...更為自然)

    He wrote his first book after returning/having returned from Mongolia.

    unquoted

    參考資料: Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners
  • 6 年前

    許多英文文法是有例外的, 如 long time no see 已被接受,不受文法約束。 但“今天不可以這樣用並不代表明天不可以,所以不能算錯."這種說法各位不覺得很可笑嗎? 足球員不就可以說“今天守門員可以用手,明天可能別的位置也可以用手,所以我把球丟進門不能算犯規,而且應該算得分”?

    2014-03-31 14:22:46 補充:

    You said it!

    For something whose rules can be changed overnight, a foul remains a foul until such fateful day.

    For something that takes time to evolve, you are telling me that it SHALL not be deemed wrong, before the evolution even takes place?

    Nuff said!

    2014-03-31 17:28:30 補充:

    Hence, you got to understand that simply babbling out words to try to have the final say can and will backfire and be used against you.

  • 6 年前

    非常感謝兩位的熱心討論,希望別因此傷了和氣。

    我剛剛google了一下,

    "before had" 有787,000筆結果,

    "before having": 2,490,000筆,

    "before being had": 4,610,000筆,

    而且搜尋"before had" 出現的句子多半都是Never "before had" he treated me well.這樣的倒裝句,並非我們所討論的結構。

    2014-03-30 22:17:54 補充:

    "after watched" : 54,800筆

    "after watching": 5,350,000筆

    "after being watched": 5,800,000筆

    "after listened" : 118,000筆

    "after listening": 9,150,000筆

    "after being listened":1,760,000筆

    2014-03-30 22:25:22 補充:

    所以目前看起來,after, before + p.p.的google搜尋筆數是遠少於加V-ing的,而且搜尋到的after, before+ -ed的句子中,大部分也都不是p.p.,而是動詞過去式,極有可能是口語用法中省略主詞的結果,而且似乎蠻多個案都是省略掉"I"這個主詞。

    其實我非常同意DaSaGwa大師所言,語言不應受限於文法這個觀點,而語言的確是會演化的。只是就現實使用狀況的頻率來看,after,before+p.p.的這個現象似乎尚未演完成。

    2014-03-30 22:39:51 補充:

    至於Do as asked. Take it for granted.這兩個例子,我同意Louis大師的看法,

    as 在此處為連接詞,

    http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/as_2

    for之後的granted則帶有名詞意味,

    不過這樣介詞後面接p.p.當受詞的狀況實在太少了,

    通常視為特殊狀況直接背起來就好了

    可是我們現在所討論的after,before加被動語態的需求則非常普遍,所以我才特別想與各位討論釐清。

    再次感謝各位!

  • 6 年前

    In my opinion, you shall not stick with preposition can only follow with V-ing. Instead you shall broaden it as "preposition + object". If so, then you certainly have

    before (or after) + p.p. (past participle phrase)

    because you can use "p.p." to lead a participle phrase and use it as an object for before (or after). For example:

    After watched the Journey, mommy said she wanna go to Hawii.

    He knows which song of Ariana is playing after listened to the first beat.

    He felt nervous about HIV after had sex without condom.

    2014-03-28 11:38:22 補充:

    preposition follows with past participle is very common, for example:

    Please do as asked !

    I took it for granted.

    I think we can take their support as given. = I think we can take (it) as given that they will support us

    2014-03-28 11:39:59 補充:

    if master Louis thinks preposition can only follow with V-ing, then how you explain

    Please do as asked!

    I took it for granted.

    2014-03-28 11:43:46 補充:

    The above two sentences are very common in daily conversation or newspaper.

    2014-03-28 11:45:05 補充:

    Master Louis! If you think preposition can only follow with V-ing, then how do you explain:

    Please do as asked!

    I took it for granted.

    2014-03-28 12:06:06 補充:

    I am sure you have seen these expressions very often!

    2014-03-28 20:22:32 補充:

    in #005

    Why you don't want to use

    Please do as being asked.

    If you can treat "as" as conjunction, then in the above sentence, it is treated as preposition.

    2014-03-28 20:34:04 補充:

    My point is NOT what is omitted in those two sentences, but people use it "as is". I just like to ask you how to explain it when it is used as is.

    2014-03-28 20:34:47 補充:

    Trust me! I do have the same idea as you have, but I have seen so many "preposition + p.p." uses in my daily life, it changes such an idea.

    2014-03-28 20:37:11 補充:

    阿蓉仔!

    You can google "before (or after) + p.p.", for example:

    "before had"

    "after watched"

    "after listened"

    ….. (with quotation marks)

    you will see people DO use it!

    2014-03-28 20:39:10 補充:

    We, as none native speakers, always treat grammar as a bible to use English. Thinking whatever doesn't agree with grammar rule is wrong. The truth is not ALL English uses agree with grammar. There are many uses that grammar CANNOT explain.

    2014-03-28 20:42:13 補充:

    We shall not treat these uses as wrong ones, if native speakers use it as is. Instead we shall learn it and use it like native speakers. Master Louis likes to refer to grammar books or dictionaries. Nevertheless, what the information said is just for what can be explained by grammar.

    2014-03-28 20:51:45 補充:

    I have NO doubt about these sayings. However, using English is NOT limited to what grammar allows. For example:

    take it for granted,

    as is,

    do as asked,

    take it for proven that,

    take it as decided that,

    All the above, you can google them, and find many hits.

    2014-03-28 20:54:52 補充:

    If so, can you say they are ALL WRONG?

    Today, you asked a question like this, yes, I certainly agree with what you have said in the question itself. However, you shall also do some homework to see whether there is any exception!

    2014-03-28 20:57:15 補充:

    I did it before, and found these uses. However, I could NOT find the explanation in ANY grammar book. I certainly cannot accept them as wrong use as master Louis says. After all, it cannot be so many WRONG uses.

    2014-03-28 21:00:44 補充:

    Maybe, this is so-called language evolution. At the present time, no grammar book will accept or explain, but many years later, maybe, it will be accepted and as part of grammar rules.

    2014-03-28 21:07:44 補充:

    I appreciate you ask this question. I have noticed this several years ago and couldn't find any explanation for it. Hopefully, some able masters can shed some light on this, without just saying this is wrong use, or it is omitted this and that.

    2014-03-28 22:07:13 補充:

    Master Louis! As I have said, your explanation is what I know of. What poster wants is whether there is ANY possibility that you can use P.P. after a preposition.

    2014-03-28 22:09:19 補充:

    I googled for a while in the past to answer my own question, and it did indicate such uses are allowed. Why? I don't have a solid idea.

    2014-03-30 23:01:15 補充:

    Like I said, the situation "before(after)+p.p. (or past participle phrase)" is not wrong, people use it in a certain situation. You brought it up and I did have this same question, so I brought it to your attention. There is NO right or wrong, but just beware of it.

    2014-03-30 23:04:11 補充:

    After all, language does evolve from time to time, what is NOT used today might be very popular tomorrow. We shall NOT simply hold onto what the grammar says and ignore its evolution. Maybe, you don't want to use it, that is fine, but at least keep in mind: such a use is being used.

    2014-03-30 23:05:55 補充:

    阿蓉仔!

    I don't mean what master Louis's saying is wrong, but just try to let you know the questioned use is in use.

    2014-03-30 23:07:27 補充:

    You asked this question to see whether people really use it. The answer is YES. Right or wrong is NOT up to use to judge.

    2014-03-30 23:20:28 補充:

    to respond #031:

    "Do as asked" is different from "Do as I say".

    "as" uses as conjunction is true for "Do as I say", because

    Do as I said = I do as I said, or you do as I say,

    You use "as" to connect TWO sentences.

    2014-03-30 23:22:29 補充:

    However, "do as asked"

    Is different story, because "do" and "asked" are NOT is the same verb tense. Hence, it is better to treat "as" as a preposition, not a conjunction.

    2014-03-30 23:23:31 補充:

    This is like

    do as being asked

    "as" is a preposition not a conjunction.

    2014-03-30 23:27:19 補充:

    typo! #037

    … are NOT is the same … ==> … are NOT in the same …

    2014-03-30 23:36:01 補充:

    yes, conjunction can connect sentence with different tenses. However, in a short sentence like "do as asked" is better to use the same tense. After all, if you use different tense. It means, the "do" is done much later than the "asked".

    2014-03-30 23:39:06 補充:

    Even though, logically, it still makes sense, but when you use "do as asked" ("as" as preposition), likely, you really want is "do as ask" ("as" as conjunction), because you want the "ask" to be done right away.

    2014-03-30 23:41:42 補充:

    What I try to say is, the function of "as" in the sentence is NOT based upon the grammar rule, but based upon the context of the sentence. We shall NOT determine its function based upon grammar!

    2014-03-30 23:42:47 補充:

    After all, grammar doesn't control the use of language. What controls the use language is based upon the idea of the person who wants to express it.

    2014-03-31 07:21:35 補充:

    You got to understand the difference between ball game and language:

    To play ball game, you set the rule BEFORE you play it.

    As for language, you use it BEFORE grammar is organized.

    2014-03-31 07:31:11 補充:

    Hence, game rule can be changed over night, but language use needs time to evolve.

  • 您覺得這個回答如何?您可以登入為回答投票。
  • 6 年前

    你說的是對的,它必須加V-ing,不能直接加p.p.

    但是若是要加p.p.是可以加在V-ing後面,

    如例句5

    以下內文是BBC網站的解釋,供你參考。

    participle clauses following conjunctions and prepositions

    Participle clauses, with -ing particularly, can be used after various conjunctions and prepositions, such as: when, while, before, after, on, without, instead of. Note the following examples:

    1. Remember to take all your belongings with you when leaving the train.

    2. I sprained my ankle while playing tennis.

    3. Before entering the mosque you must take off your shoes.

    4. After taking everything into consideration, we decided to sell the house.

    5. After having driven 300 miles across country, I arrived to find the house had been sold.

    6. On hearing that my sister was planning to marry him, I decided to leave the flat to her.

    7. Without wanting to seem rude, I must tell you that you are ungrateful.

    8. Instead of listening to my advice, she walked out without saying goodbye.

    Note from the above examples that the participle clause normally, but not invariably, comes in front of the main clause.

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。