Antecedents

[gschmilinsky]

ramyagupta,

 

1) "that" is a relative pronoun and relative pronouns usually introduce subordinate phrases or clauses. Relative clauses that begin with "that" are restrictive clauses (essential clauses) as opposed to non-restrictive clauses that begin with "which"

 

2) Participial phrases are not noun phrases. Participial phrases begin with a participle. A participle is either Verb-stem + ing, known as the present participle or verb with -ed ending, known as the past participle.

 

3) sorry, don't understand the question

 

4) sorry, don't exactly understand this question either

 

5) this is a punctuation question and I don't believe (based on statement 800Bob has made) that GMAC will test this concept. If I were to take off my GMAT hat, I would answer the question by attaching this link: http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/commas.asp

[dileepsh]

thanks gshmilinsky,

 

so i will take it as 'participial phrase attaches to nearest noun but there are some exception to this "

[gschmilinsky]

At least with regard to the examples in OG that I mentioned earlier. Grammar is complex so I've come to realize that the exceptions to the rules can and often are numerous, but by reading how GMAC thinks, you have a standing chance.

 

There are countless exceptions in OG11. In fact one could argue that they are not exceptions, but rather the rule of thumb. I will eventually name all the relevant participles in OG10 and OG11, so you can make up your own mind.

 

One last thought that I believe is extremely important. I asked someone who is far far better than I am at determining the correct rules and grammar in general what his thoughts were on this subject and he (he's someone who had a perfect score on the exam) said, "In general, a participial phrase set off from the rest of the sentence with commas is understood to modify the subject of the sentence"

 

So, I guess there's no easy answer to this mystery. I'll keep posting OG material on both sides.

 

By the way OG11 has a great example showing the subject as the referent, where they have a dangling modifier as the opening phrase and then switch the order around but still name it a dangling modifier. That's why falling for a rule like participial phrases refer to the nearest noun can be very dangerous . I'll post the example later.

[ramyagupta]

hey ..good explantion... Thanks

 

The way i tried to convey my point over the diffirence between rather than and instead looks totally skewed... Thats the way i take my notes..shortcuts.. :-) Only i can decode eliminating all those typo's :-)

 

Here its is

 

Rather than/Instead of

 

 

 

In simple words...usage of instead of /Rather than ..

[gschmilinsky]

Some words of wisdom from 800Bob (see link) http://www.www.urch.com/forums/gmat-sentence-correction/47645-og10-120-vs-179-191-partipial-phrase-referents.html#post314256

 

I am prepared to revise my attempt at a general rule. I now say:

"A participial phrase located at the beginning or the end of a clause and set off from that clause with commas generally modifies the subject of the clause."

 

Thus 120(E) "...when Athens was taken by General Mohammed the Conqueror, the Turkish sultan, establishing a Mosque in the building and using the Acropolis as a fortress" is problematic because the grammar rule says that the phrase refers to "Athens," but common sense says it refers to "sultan."

 

The explanation to 179 says of D and E that the participial phrases "appear at first to refer to the immediately preceding noun." As one reads further, one realizes that the participial phrase in each case is at the beginning of a clause, and so it later appears to modify the following subject. That's what is called a "squinting modifier" -- one that is located between two possible referents and requiring the reader to work a little extra hard to figure out what the writer intended.

 

As for 191 (D), I'm not sure what the explanation means by "the participial phrase creating... attaches to the nouns checks." I think the writer of the explanation is intentionally avoiding the word "modifies" here. Choice (D) is impossible in any case because of the missing "and." If the sentence had been:

 

"Lawmakers are examining measures that would require banks to disclose all fees and account requirements in writing and to provide free cashing of government checks, creating basic service accounts to carry minimal fees and require minimal initial deposits."

 

...then I would say that the participial phrase creating... modifies (illogically) the subject that (= measures).

 

In any case, I think gschmilinsky has shown that grammar rules are not so clearcut as math rules. I can find no reputable grammar source that provides a scientific explanation for identifying the antecedent of a pronoun or the referent of a modifier. All I find is vague rules such as "make a pronoun refer clearly to one antecedent" and "place modifiers where they will clearly modify the words intended."

[dileepsh]

hey ..good explantion... Thanks

 

The way i tried to convey my point over the diffirence between rather than and instead looks totally skewed... Thats the way i take my notes..shortcuts.. :-) Only i can decode eliminating all those typo's :-)

 

Here its is

 

Rather than/Instead of

 

 

 

In simple words...usage of instead of /Rather than ..

 

ramya, spidey notes tells more clearly about the usage of instead of/rather than.

[gschmilinsky]

http://www.english.uiuc.edu/cws/wworkshop/writer_resources/grammar_handbook/verbals_verb_phrases.htm

 

Good link regarding participial phrases.

[post2ashish]

thanks for the link gsc

[T-REX]

A nice document on Gerunds, Participials and Infinitives.

Hope it helps.

[T-REX]

Found a great website for grammar

 

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/index.html#grammar

[fsajjad]

Hi, I came across a 1000SC question and have the following doubt

293. Federal incentives now encourage investing capital in commercial office buildings despite vacancy rates in existing structures that are exceptionally high and no demand for new construction.

(A) ...

(B) capital investment in commercial office buildings, even though vacancy rates in existing structures are exceptionally high and there is

...

(E) capital investment in commercial office buildings despite vacancy rates in existing structures that are exceptionally high, and although there is

Well, the answer is B, but I am not concerned much with it. What I would like to know is what does "that" refer in choices A & E.

According to the previous posts in the "antecedent thread" by Erin, 800Bob and gschmilinsky, relative pronouns (that) refers to immeadiately preceding noun with the following exceptions: when the preceding noun is an object of an infinitive, gerund or other verb form or a part of prepositional phrase. So according to the above rule

A) ...capital in commercial office buildings despite vacancy rates in existing structures that

Here that cannot refer to existing strucutres as it is a part of prepositional phrase (in existing structures ) so it should refer to vacancy rates.

E) same as above

Can you please tell whether my reasoning is correct?

Another 1000SC question with similar doubt

289. Executives and federal officials say that the use of crack and cocaine is growing rapidly among workers, significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already are a cost to business of more than $100 billion a year.

(A) significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already are a cost to business of

(B) significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already cost business

...

What does 'which' refer to

(B) significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already cost businessThanks in advance.Going by the reasoning in this thread, 'which' cannot refer to alcohol abuse because the following verb 'cost' is plural and therefore 'which' should refer to 'effects'.

Please help me. Erin, 800Bob, gschmilinsky thanks in advance

[gschmilinsky]

Yes, that refers to 'vacancy rates'. The bad modifier: 'investing capital' is not correct for A. Yes 'which' refers to 'the effects'. 'of drug and alcohol abuse' is a prepositional phrase modifying 'the effects' i.e. explaining the effects better.

[fsajjad]

Thanks gschmilinsky for your replies. I have another SC, one of the most famous ones and a lot many times discussed before

379. In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them in the area just for the season.

(A) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them

(B) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of whom are

 

Well the answer is B as told by Erin and 800Bob. The doubt I have is in one of the discussion 800Bob says even the choice A looks good at least for the 1st part of the sentence. Here is his explanation:

""patchwork of green fields that surround" vs. "patchwork of green fields that surrounds"

Both are possible. They have very slightly different meanings, but both meanings make sense. In the first case "that" is plural and refers to "fields." In the second case "that" is singular and refers to "patchwork.""

 

Now according to 800Bob in choice A, 'that' can refer to 'green fields', but according to the rules discussed in this thread a relative pronoun (that, which etc) cannot refer to a preceding noun if the preceding noun is an object of an infinitive, gerund or other verb form or a part of prepositional phrase(In this case a part of prepositional phrase). So, 'that' can refer only to patchwork?

Can you please tell what inference should I draw? Erin. 800Bob can you please give your comments on it. Thanks

[Erin]

Thanks gschmilinsky for your replies. I have another SC, one of the most famous ones and a lot many times discussed before

379. In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them in the area just for the season.

(A) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them

(B) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of whom are

 

Well the answer is B as told by Erin and 800Bob. The doubt I have is in one of the discussion 800Bob says even the choice A looks good at least for the 1st part of the sentence. Here is his explanation:

""patchwork of green fields that surround" vs. "patchwork of green fields that surrounds"

Both are possible. They have very slightly different meanings, but both meanings make sense. In the first case "that" is plural and refers to "fields." In the second case "that" is singular and refers to "patchwork.""

 

Now according to 800Bob in choice A, 'that' can refer to 'green fields', but according to the rules discussed in this thread a relative pronoun (that, which etc) cannot refer to a preceding noun if the preceding noun is an object of an infinitive, gerund or other verb form or a part of prepositional phrase(In this case a part of prepositional phrase). So, 'that' can refer only to patchwork?

Can you please tell what inference should I draw? Erin. 800Bob can you please give your comments on it. Thanks

Take a look. Both are possible:

• the collection of books that is in my room
  
• the collection of books that are in my room

In this example, as in the example you're using (patchwork of green fields), the first noun and the second noun are really the same thing. Either is okay, although I think that I would go with the first option (the collection of books that is in my room) because we're more concerned with the collection than with the books.

 

Contrast this information with another grammar item that appears on the GMAT:

 

*she is one of the few people who speak Thai

 

or

 

she is one of the few people who speak Thai?

 

In this case, the relative pronoun who refers to people, the object of the preposition of.

[12rk34]

T-REX vbmenu_register("postmenu_352950", true); ,

The link does not work. Could you pls. check.

[12rk34]

It is o.k. now. Thanks.

[gschmilinsky]

Erin is exactly right once again. I couldn't have said it better myself. Unfortunately, rules (like object of the preposition) are guidelines but they don't always work nicely to get you to the answer. GMAT writers are skilled at making sure you understand the nuances of what is right or wrong and when. I use those rules to guide me but then I take a step back to look at the context and whether it makes sense. You have to do both, if you want to do well on the GMAT.

[manjulavenkataraghavan]

Hey thanks a lot that was a real good funda.

[fsajjad]

Contrast this information with another grammar item that appears on the GMAT:

 

*she is one of the few people who speaks Thai

 

or

 

she is one of the few people who speak Thai?

Hi Erin, thanks for the reply. For the 2nd example you gave above, did you miss 's' in speaks

Referring from one of your earlier posts where you mentioned the rule for

one of +plural noun+ who/that +plural verb

Going by the above rule, I think the example which you mentioned can be only : she is one of the few people who speak Thai? Here who always refer to people and not one.

After reading your post I am a bit confused. Do you mean it can be also:

she is one of the few people who speaks Thai? where who referes to one.. I use to consider the one of rule as perfect and untouchable..:( Please clarify

[12rk34]

Contrast this information with another grammar item that appears on the GMAT:

 

*she is one of the few people who speaks Thai

 

or

 

she is one of the few people who speak Thai?

 

Here since 'she' is important and not 'the few people' I think the first sentence (she is one of the few people who speaks Thai) should be correct.

[gmat_lover]

Hi Guys,

I have taken this Q from another thread fro discussion.

Following Bob THEY in these ANS optons should refer to Traffic safety officials. So is there anyway it can refer to Drivers .

 

Traffic safety officials predict that drivers will be equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as the current one.

A. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as

B. equally likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are

C. equally likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as

D. as likely that they will exceed the proposed speed limit as

E. as likely to exceed the proposed speed limit as they are

 

BTW OG is E. that means they refer to drivers and not offcials. Now I am confused how to apply Bob's rule.

[fsajjad]

Hi gmat_lover, Quoting 800Bob (see the 1st page on this thread)

"Relative pronouns (that, who, which) agree with the immediately preceding noun.

Subject and object pronouns (it, they, them) agree with the subject of the preceding clause or sentence."

As per the above rule, 'they' should refer to the subject (Traffic safety officials) of the previous clause "Traffic safety officials predict.."

 

Now my turn to post few queries :) from 1000 SC:

656. Some analysts contend that true capitalism exists

only when the ownership of both property and the means of

production is regarded as an inalienable right of an

individual’s, and it is not a license granted by government

and revokable at whim.

(A) is regarded as an inalienable right of an individual’s,

and it is not

(B) are regarded as individuals’ inalienable rights, and that

it not be

© is regarded as an individual’s inalienable right, not as

(D) are regarded as an individual’s inalienable rights, not

when they are

(E) is regarded as the inalienable rights of an individual,

not when it is

The ans is C. I want to know whether 'it' in A & E is ambigous in the sense it can refer to either 'capitalism' or 'ownership' OR 'it' refers

unambiguously to 'capitalism'?

 

652. Since the movie was released seventeen UFOs have been

sighted in the state, which is more than had been sighted in

the past ten years together.

(A) which is more than had been sighted

(B) more than had been sighted

© more than they had sighted

(D) more than had reported sightings

(E) which is more than had reported sightings

The ans is B.

In 'A' & 'E' does 'which' refer to 'state' or 'UFOs'? Applying the

rule, 'which' should refer to 'UFOs' because 'state' is an object

of prepositional phrase 'in the state'

 

Erin, Bob, gschmilinsky please comment on the above. I feel these concepts are very necessary to have a good grasp on SC

[fsajjad]

Hi This is GMATPrep question:

In ancient Thailand, much of the local artisans’ creative energy was expended for the creation of Buddha images and when they constructed and decorated the temples that enshrined them.

A. ....

B. much of the local artisans’ creative energy was expended on the creation of Buddha images and on construction and decoration of the temples in which they were enshrined

 

The correct ans is B. Isn't 'they' in B is ambiguous in that it can refer to Buddha images or temples. OR

If 'they' is not ambiguous, is it because 'which' refers to temples and therefore 'they' can refer to Buddha images.

Please tell whether my reasoning is correct or not? Thanks