1.Chameleons serve as an example of amouflage as they can blend in
"the surrounding" by changing the colors of their skin.
2.Susan Boyle has grasped worldwide attention since her triumph at theTV show,
Britain's Got Talent, through which her angelic voice "has" touched millions of
3.People celebrate Susan's achievement not only because she has talent, but
also because she has the courage to pursue her dreams in the face of "what"
might often appear tobe insurmountable obstacles.
- DaSaGwaLv 76 年前最佳解答
1.Chameleons serve as an example of camouflage as they can blend in "with the surrounding" by changing the colors of their skin.
The entire sentence is narrated in present tense, so you shall NOT suddenly change to a past tense. Besides the "touch" doesn't not end in the past, it still is.
Using "what" is to lead this sentence:
what might often appear to be insurmountable obstacles (往往似乎是難以逾越的障礙)
It wants "what"(是……的事物), not "which"(哪一個).
2014-04-27 22:48:31 補充：
Let's not talk about grammar, but just understanding the basic. The difference between which and what is
When you use "what," you have NO idea whether something is available. However, when you use "which," there are choices that are available.
2014-04-27 22:51:57 補充：
"might often appear to be insurmountable obstacles" doesn't indicate choices (or availability), but just the situation. This is why you use "what". Even though in a sentence like:
He also had a gun with which to defend himself .
2014-04-27 22:53:22 補充：
It doesn't clearly indicate "choice", but if you read it carefully, it is there, that is "which = gun".
Hence, if you want to replace "which" with "what". The sentence will sound weird.
2014-04-27 22:58:05 補充：
Other people might give you a term called "relative pronoun". However, personally, I feel it doesn't help, but just add more burden in your learning.
When we start learning English, these five words: what, who, which, how, and where, we use it to ask questions.
2014-04-27 23:00:12 補充：
Then later, it evolves into other uses and more terminologies are introduced. Nevertheless, no matter how they evolved or advanced, their fundamental meaning is still there. If you can use the understanding of their fundamental meanings, you can still use them correctly and skillfully.
2014-04-27 23:01:37 補充：
without being bothered by the grammar terminologies and rules.
2014-04-27 23:13:59 補充：
continue in opinion!
2014-04-27 23:14:51 補充：
Hopefully, this kind of non-grammatical way of explanation can inspire you to understand your trouble with "what" and "which".
2014-04-28 05:16:34 補充：
"blend in" only has the meaning of "harmonize". You need "with" to indicate what will harmonize "with".
2014-04-28 05:17:31 補充：
Otherwise, you will use blend INTO, instead of blend "IN".
2014-04-28 05:20:56 補充：
On the other hand, since it has "the" in front of surrounding, there is NO need to use plural of surrounding.
2014-04-29 02:27:38 補充：
Dark Helmet! If you like to comment on the situation, you shall comment on EVERYTHING, not just what you think is right. How about "with the surrounding"?
If you still has to be verbally hostile towards me, you really are wasting your talent. How pitiful you are !!
2014-04-29 02:32:53 補充：
Dark Helmet's saying to me is NOT the first time, but regularly. Star and poster! If you like to know what kind of people Dark Helmet is, please go to my account and read through my answer, you will see his excellent work.
2014-04-29 02:34:56 補充：
By the way, I don't like to talk about grammar, I try not to use grammar to explanation things, but my own understanding of the context.
2014-04-29 02:52:45 補充：
About "the surrounding": If "the surroundings" is correct, then "the surrounding" is also correct. After all, how do you know the author talk about one particular surrounding, or many surroundings. I am sure, author has the right to choose which one to use.
2014-04-29 02:54:58 補充：
The question was:
Why cannot I use "had"? not "touched".
2014-04-29 02:56:15 補充：
If Dark Helemt can do that, then I would use ALL past tense for the entire sentence, because I don't know whether, nowadays, people still get touched by her!
2014-04-29 07:09:08 補充：
If you apply this attitude to everyone who doesn't satisfy you, then I would NOT say anything. However, in your case, you obviously and particularly concentrate on me ONLY. This is why I cannot accept.
2014-04-29 07:10:17 補充：
Besides your comment in this question is TOO one-sided and NOT completely correct either, because you take a point and use that point to go against things that are NOT a problem at all.
2014-04-29 07:13:05 補充：
Like "had" and "has". If the narrator STATES the situation with the tense related to present, suddenly, he uses a "past tense". Is that reasonable? NO!
That was MY understand of the context, anything wrong?
2014-04-29 07:15:00 補充：
Yet, you want to use "並沒有兩件發生在過去的事所以不能用過去完成式". That is your own explanation. I cannot argue right or wrong. This is the kind of problem you have. You think your English is Absolutely right, yet others are wrong simply because others don't think the same way as you do.
2014-04-29 07:16:26 補充：
Language is an expression of a person's thought. Such a thought can vary from person to person, even they all use the same meaning but with different sentence pattern. Does it mean one is wrong and the other is right!
2014-04-29 07:20:27 補充：
You have good English ability. Why can you use DISCUSSION to express your difference. Yet you have to use UNFRIENDLY statement to show your superior and look down to people (me).
2014-04-29 07:22:33 補充：
Have you used a different way yourself? Every time my answer doesn't satisfy you, you use UNFRIENDLY words, is that NEW on your part. Why don't you show me what you mean by "來點新鮮的"? How about using Spanish from now on?
2014-04-29 07:27:12 補充：
cogida usted mismo!
2014-04-29 07:35:12 補充：
The above expression can mean very differently from one country to the other (Spanish speaking counties).
What I use for the meaning I want can land me a penalty!
2014-04-29 08:38:42 補充：
Let me point out the problem with Star's answer, and you tell me why you didn't say anything:
This statement tells you that you can use "simple tense (present or past)".
2014-04-29 08:40:45 補充：
Hence, using "simple tense (present or past)" matches your saying:
However, the question is why use "has", but not "had". Does the stated answer answers the poster's question?
2014-04-29 08:43:14 補充：
Besides, if simple tense (present or past) can do the job, why the answer is "has touched", not "touches"?
In a word, Star didn't actually answer the question, and you have provided the answer that doesn't match Star's argument.
2014-04-29 08:44:53 補充：
You suggest to use "past simple tense", but the sentence use "has touched" (a present perfect tense). Why you didn't say anything?
2014-04-29 08:50:24 補充：
About "the surrounding": I state using "the" will give the meaning of "a group" (that includes all the member in this group). Star thinks, it shall be "the surroundings". To me, using "the surroundings" is just part of the group, why bothers?
2014-04-29 08:51:41 補充：
Yet, you have to state ""因為有 THE 就不需用複數" 論一樣,毫無文法根據." Yes, I don't know grammar. However, I do know what "the surrounding" can stand for. Tell me why you have to use that statement ?
2014-04-29 08:56:01 補充：
Anybody who knows English can tell that is NOT true, because I don't mean "不需用複數", but not needed in that case. Also, people know that is just picking bone in an egg.
Hence, my saying "用詞不友善" is very true, and I will keep using if you keep doing it.
2014-04-29 12:46:50 補充：
Forgot to say this:
Using "the surrounding" can mean a particular or specific surrounding. If so, why needs "the surroundings"?
There are some shortcomings in Star's answer, why do you keep silent on his (or her) part?
2014-04-30 01:25:25 補充：
In fact, I did address this issue, let me say it again as follows:
using "the" in "the surrounding" can mean:
2014-04-30 01:27:29 補充：
(1)specific or particular surrounding
(2)a group of surrounding
To me, it means "specific surrounding", because chameleons change their colors according to specific surrounding.
2014-04-30 01:32:26 補充：
Different surrounding will change their skin color differently. This is why it uses "the" to specify the particular surrounding it is in.
2014-04-30 01:37:41 補充：
As far as "with the surrounding" is concerned, because "blend in" only mean "harmonize". You need to use "with" to tell people WHAT it harmonizes "with."
2014-04-30 01:38:10 補充：
only mean == only means
2014-04-30 01:38:27 補充：
You can use "blend into" (融入)
blend in with ="合" …. 融在一起
blend in = 融在一起 (without telling "with" what)
2014-04-30 01:44:53 補充：
About using plural of "surrounding":
As indicated in #035 "the surrounding" can also tell people "a group of surrounding." Then why bothers to use surroundings. All it can mean is just MANY surroundings.
2014-04-30 01:47:17 補充：
As we know, chameleons change skin colors with ALL surroundings, not just one. a few or even many surroundings. If so, do we need to use "surroundings"?
- Dark HelmetLv 76 年前
STAR 說的是正確的.第二題句中並沒有兩件發生在過去的事所以不能用過去完成式, 但是可以用過去式(touched)。所以大師一級的 "現在式Y和過去式不能並存於同一個句子" 論,基本上和她的 "因為有 THE 就不需用複數" 論一樣,毫無文法根據.
2014-04-29 06:53:27 補充：
妳除了咬住我的"用詞不友善"，能不能來點新鮮的? 好言相勸多少次了? 大家上來知識互相學習,只要以助人為出發點, 依自己邏輯推想出答案不是壞事. 說過很多次只希望妳不要未經求證就當事實來發表, 這樣會誤導很多信以為真的初學者的. 當別人提出正確答案時又硬凹更是妨礙發問者學習. 被選為最佳解答的答案如果是錯的,那是幫到人還是幫倒忙?
2014-04-30 14:24:05 補充：
TO: Star ( 初學者 3級),
You can lead a horse to the lake, but you cannot make it drink the water.
2014-04-30 14:24:53 補充：
Though not in a babysitting mood today, I managed to come up with a few responses:
RE:016 Can you name one other person who fabricates out of thin air, such groundless, speculative, imaginary and bogus answers and then presents them as postulates?
2014-04-30 14:26:46 補充：
RE:017~018 Even if I grant you the Reasonable? No!
But is the use of simple past :
1- grammatically correct? YES
2- allowed in the sentence? YES
Therefore, the reason you gave is obviously NOT why past perfect "had" is prohibited in the sentence.
- 6 年前
1. 我認為這裡有問題的是 the surroundings，因為這個字大多用複數形
2. has +p.p. 表"現在完成式"，用於表示"某事或某動作/狀態" 從以前就發生持續到現在，而 had +p.p 為"過去完成式" 有兩種用法: (1) 發生於過去的兩件事，較早的用過去完成式，較晚發生的用過去式，以看出先後。
ex. When I got to the station, the train had gone.
ex. Before I moved to Tainan, I had lived in Taipei for five years.
這句應該是指"蘇珊大嬸(到目前為止)的歌聲仍和動了無數歌迷的心。 所以該用 has/have +p.p.
3. 若要用 which, 應該要有先行詞(也就是被修飾的名詞) 要不然which 叫關係帶名詞是要代替哪一個名詞呢?
ex. The words which you used are mean. 你用的字眼很那個。
What you said is mean.
what 叫複合關代，就是要解決這種沒有先行詞的窘境~(就是二合一呼巄過去啦)參考資料： myself