Idiom/Noun modifier question

[yo4561]

Happy Saturday!

Let's say I have the following example:

"The bakery was established by vegans using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals."

I realize that the idiom is "use X as the means to Y", however this just sounds wrong to my ear/I am confused on the noun modifier.

I would want to change this to either:

(1) The bakery was established by vegans who used almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.
(2) The bakery was established by vegans, using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.

Why would (1) and (2) be incorrect?
Is it just because the "using" is a noun modifier and that "using almond milk and egg..." just refers to what the noun because that is what they do... use almond milk and egg substitute? Couldn't you make the case that "using almond milk..." is an adverbial modifier? Or, is it not an adverbial modifier because then "using almond milk..." would refer to the "bakery" which does not make as much sense as referring to the vegans?

What is the difference between a noun -ing modifier and a noun "who" modifier?

Thank you in advance

[esledge]

Let's say I have the following example:

"The bakery was established by vegans using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals."

I realize that the idiom is "use X as the means to Y", however this just sounds wrong to my ear/I am confused on the noun modifier.

I would want to change this to either:

(1) The bakery was established by vegans who used almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.
(2) The bakery was established by vegans, using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.

Why would (1) and (2) be incorrect?

This might sound wrong to you because the idiom is just not a good fit (meaning-wise) for the “use X” part: “almond milk and egg substitute” are not “the means to help animals,” exactly.

The means to help animals could be “the bakery” or even capitalism in general (it’s not in the sentence right now). For that reason, I think your (1) and (2) changes still miss the mark.

Is it just because the "using" is a noun modifier and that "using almond milk and egg..." just refers to what the noun because that is what they do... use almond milk and egg substitute? Couldn't you make the case that "using almond milk..." is an adverbial modifier? Or, is it not an adverbial modifier because then "using almond milk..." would refer to the "bakery" which does not make as much sense as referring to the vegans?

In the original, “vegans using almond milk…” uses -ing as a noun modifier, so the “using” is just describing the vegans. You cannot make the case that “using almond milk…” is an adverbial modifier because that would require a comma before “using.”

Thus, in the original sentence, the core sentence reduces to “The bakery was established by (certain) vegans…as the means to help the animals.” So maybe it’s not actually the “use X as the means to Y” idiom, but “established X as the means to Y,” which is similar, and your ear is reacting to the mish-mash of two idioms.

How about this? (I added the part in parentheses, to show a comma -ing modifier that might be a better explanation of how/why the bakery helps animals.):

Baking with almond milk and egg substitute, the vegan founders used their bakery as the means to help animals(, donating a portion of profits to rescue organizations).

What is the difference between a noun -ing modifier and a noun "who" modifier?

Usually "who" has a tensed verb in the modifier, and there can be slight meaning differences based on context.

The people wearing ribbons today are raising awareness for their cause.
(The modifier tells you which people are doing the main verb.)

The bakers who only use almond milk and egg substitute have felt the greatest effects of the supply disruption due to the strike.
(Again, which people, but the modifier also gives context for why those specific people are feeling the effects of the supply disruption.

The vegan bakers, who are wearing matching t-shirts today, plan to meet tonight at city hall.
(This who modifier is less about identifying which bakers (the adjective "vegan" does that), and might just be an incidental remark that is inessential to the rest of the sentence, thus the commas.)

[yo4561]

Let's say I have the following example:

"The bakery was established by vegans using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals."

I realize that the idiom is "use X as the means to Y", however this just sounds wrong to my ear/I am confused on the noun modifier.

I would want to change this to either:

(1) The bakery was established by vegans who used almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.
(2) The bakery was established by vegans, using almond milk and egg substitute as the means to help the animals.

Why would (1) and (2) be incorrect?

This might sound wrong to you because the idiom is just not a good fit (meaning-wise) for the “use X” part: “almond milk and egg substitute” are not “the means to help animals,” exactly.

The means to help animals could be “the bakery” or even capitalism in general (it’s not in the sentence right now). For that reason, I think your (1) and (2) changes still miss the mark.

Is it just because the "using" is a noun modifier and that "using almond milk and egg..." just refers to what the noun because that is what they do... use almond milk and egg substitute? Couldn't you make the case that "using almond milk..." is an adverbial modifier? Or, is it not an adverbial modifier because then "using almond milk..." would refer to the "bakery" which does not make as much sense as referring to the vegans?

In the original, “vegans using almond milk…” uses -ing as a noun modifier, so the “using” is just describing the vegans. You cannot make the case that “using almond milk…” is an adverbial modifier because that would require a comma before “using.”

Thus, in the original sentence, the core sentence reduces to “The bakery was established by (certain) vegans…as the means to help the animals.” So maybe it’s not actually the “use X as the means to Y” idiom, but “established X as the means to Y,” which is similar, and your ear is reacting to the mish-mash of two idioms.

How about this? (I added the part in parentheses, to show a comma -ing modifier that might be a better explanation of how/why the bakery helps animals.):

Baking with almond milk and egg substitute, the vegan founders used their bakery as the means to help animals(, donating a portion of profits to rescue organizations).

What is the difference between a noun -ing modifier and a noun "who" modifier?

Usually "who" has a tensed verb in the modifier, and there can be slight meaning differences based on context.

The people wearing ribbons today are raising awareness for their cause.
(The modifier tells you which people are doing the main verb.)

The bakers who only use almond milk and egg substitute have felt the greatest effects of the supply disruption due to the strike.
(Again, which people, but the modifier also gives context for why those specific people are feeling the effects of the supply disruption.

The vegan bakers, who are wearing matching t-shirts today, plan to meet tonight at city hall.
(This who modifier is less about identifying which bakers (the adjective "vegan" does that), and might just be an incidental remark that is inessential to the rest of the sentence, thus the commas.)

Thank you so much Emily for your very thorough response. You are wonderful!!!

[esledge]

Thanks! I'm glad it helped.