高手帮忙改这一个句子的语错误!However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which underling all of the environment problems.请说的具体点哦。怎么改。不要改句子，只要改

高手帮忙改这一个句子的语错误!However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which underling all of the environment problems.请说的具体点哦。怎么改。不要改句子，只要改
高手帮忙改这一个句子的语错误!
However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which underling all of the environment problems.
请说的具体点哦。怎么改。不要改句子，只要改单词.OF我自己也会改
可我觉得WHICH是修饰vital element的，这样的话就不存在逗号的问题了
那把UNDERLING 改成UNDERLIES也是可以的吧
最后一位朋友我不明白你的意思，这句原文的中文：是否不断增加的汽油消耗是导致所有环境问题的最重要因素——这是十分难确定的

高手帮忙改这一个句子的语错误!However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which underling all of the environment problems.请说的具体点哦。怎么改。不要改句子，只要改
这句话错在 which underling.
Which 后面应该跟一个动词,所以应改为：which underlies.
还有一种改法,是直接去掉which,这样变成了：the vital element underling ...把从句变成一个动名词来修饰the vital element.
我的意思是：这句话有两种说法.
1.However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which underies all of the environment problems.
2.However,it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element underling all of the environment problems.
清楚了吗?

However, it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element of the environment problems. 后面不能再用从句作表语的定语了，所以就去掉which undering.

在which underling all of the environment problems.前+个逗号就好了。
整个从句是修饰 the increasing consumption of petrol。
可以把underling改成caused
可以~

which引导的定语从句，后面要紧跟动词（cause)；环境问题应标达成environmental issues.这样比较合适。
However, it is really hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element which caused all of the environmental issues.

本句的前面一部分，句意比较清楚，句子的语法结构没有什么问题。即：‘it’作为形式主语，取代‘to say that ...'的实际主语。
问题是在后面由‘which’引出的部分。若引出定语从句，则出现的问题是：被这一定语从句所修饰的先行词是哪一个词或哪一部分。若先行词是‘the vital element’，就出现了逻辑上的问题。因为‘the vital element’不能是造成‘all...

全部展开

本句的前面一部分，句意比较清楚，句子的语法结构没有什么问题。即：‘it’作为形式主语，取代‘to say that ...'的实际主语。
问题是在后面由‘which’引出的部分。若引出定语从句，则出现的问题是：被这一定语从句所修饰的先行词是哪一个词或哪一部分。若先行词是‘the vital element’，就出现了逻辑上的问题。因为‘the vital element’不能是造成‘all of the enviroement’的原因，而应当是‘the increasing consumption of petrol’才是造成‘all of the enviroement’的原因。若先行词为‘the increasing consumption of petrol’，这个定语从句同先行词隔的太远。若用‘，’分开，则定语从句修饰了前面全句。也不合适。这是语法和逻辑上都存在的问题。而且，定语从句作为句子的话，它的语法成分不完整。
再有，‘underling’一词费解，所以，有的朋友将其改为‘cause’，使得句子成为真正的定语从句。且慢，我们造句或写文章除了注意语法还要注意逻辑。请看一下改为定语从句的后句子逻辑。因为定语紧跟的先行词是‘the vital element’,这样造成我上文提到的逻辑上问题。
我有两种改法，其一，However, it is realy hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element, which causes all of the environment problems.句中，将费解的‘underling’改为‘cause’，再将定语从句其先行词用‘，’隔开。其二，However, it is hard to say that the increasing consumption of petrol is the vital element, while underling all of the environment problems. 将‘which’改为‘while’,用‘，’号分开后保留原费解的词‘underling’。在‘while’此后面可以直接跟分词。
我的意见偏向于第二种改法，无论从语法或逻辑方面都能够满足原句和原意的要求。第一种改法只满足了语法要求，有比较严重逻辑问题。
另外，‘element’一词最好改为‘factor’。这是真正我们写这句话要表达的意思。
不知是否能够满足这位提问题朋友的要求。若有不清楚，请提出来共同商榷。

收起

undering应该改成动词形式