Doubt about Relative Pronoun

[goelmohit2002]

Hi All,

The following is a correct option in the one of the practice questions. But in general I have one doubt regarding this option and many similar options of other questions. That confuses me a lot.

=============================================================
Here in the below sentence, isn't "whose" modifying the noun immediately preceding it.

as per my understanding....whose should modify the nearest noun....but here the nearest noun is American west....shouldn't it be next to Women.... the noun that whose try to modify ?

(B) Unlike many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, whose craftwork was accorded low status, Native American women of the Plains tribes

[Ben Ku]

Hi,

Please cite the source (author) of this question. Thanks.

[selva.e]

(B) Unlike many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, whose craftwork was accorded low status, Native American women of the Plains tribes

usually relative pronouns refer to the subject of the preceding clause.

Also whose refers to the plural subject, if you see in the prceding main clause,

Unlike many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West,

women settlers - plural

[mikrodj]

Hi All,

The following is a correct option in the one of the practice questions. But in general I have one doubt regarding this option and many similar options of other questions. That confuses me a lot.

=============================================================
Here in the below sentence, isn't "whose" modifying the noun immediately preceding it.

as per my understanding....whose should modify the nearest noun....but here the nearest noun is American west....shouldn't it be next to Women.... the noun that whose try to modify ?

(B) Unlike many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, whose craftwork was accorded low status, Native American women of the Plains tribes

whose normally modifies the nearest noun; however, if that noun is part of a prepositional phrase, then whose can modify either the noun that the prepositional phrase modifies or the noun just preceding whose

In your sentence

women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, whose
whose can refer to women settlers.

IMO in this situation you have to decide using the context.

[esledge]

Yes, please post the original source of this example.

However, I will respond to clear up some issues.

You can break the so-called "proximity rule" for whose, which, who, etc. IF the phrase between the modifier and the noun you intend to modify:
(1) is essential
(2) does not introduce confusion.

In your example, "in the 19th century" is essential--without it, we wouldn't know which women settlers were meant.

Whose can actually refer back to either singular or plural nouns:
The boy, whose shoes were untied, tripped while running down the sidewalk.
Many people whose tickets had been lost demanded a refund.

However, who and whose can only refer back to people (or maybe named animals, such as pets), never to things. Therefore, it is not confusing to have whose follow the comma after American West. Whose must not modify that noun, and is rightly understood to modify settlers.