modifier "which"

[gmatwork]

An exception to the use of "which" modifier is that we can use it as below -

Noun1 + essential modifier describing the noun, "which" modifier

In the above construction, "which" modifier will modify Noun1 and NOT the noun that is physically the closest one to "which"

What type or types of essential modifiers are allowed in the above construct to act as the descriptive phrase for Noun1.

[tim]

where have you encountered that exception? it seems that if you are proposing an exception you must already have some examples in mind..

[Willy]

An exception to the use of "which" modifier is that we can use it as below -

Noun1 + essential modifier describing the noun, "which" modifier

In the above construction, "which" modifier will modify Noun1 and NOT the noun that is physically the closest one to "which"

What type or types of essential modifiers are allowed in the above construct to act as the descriptive phrase for Noun1.

Yes, In case I get you want you want to say, I think you are right.

e.g. consider this example (I hope my example is correct)

Willy killed the tiger with scales, which lived in the hole behind Willy's house.

In this sentence WHICH refers to tiger not the "scales" as 'scales' didn't live in the hole but tiger.

I believe the same rule is used in the OG12 q26. In this question, in correct choice E, WHICH refers to Letters not Dickinson.

So, I believe it is allowable only in the cases when you can't place a phrase that is a part of noun being modified (i.e. as in above example 'with scales') anywhere else, i.e. you can't say

Willy killed the tiger, which lived in the hole (with scales) behind Willy's house.

Hole with scales?? -- doesn't make any sense

Or, you can't say

Willy killed the tiger, which lived in the hole behind Willy's house (with scales).

Willy's house with scales??

also WHICH modifier modifying SCALES doesn't make sense.

Most importantly, such usage must make sense!

Tim can you please look into my reasoning and also in q26 of OG12 and let us know whether my reasoning was okay?

Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

What type or types of essential modifiers are allowed in the above construct to act as the descriptive phrase for Noun1.

i've only seen gmac do this with prepositional phrases.
e.g.,
parents of young children, who...
--> here, "who" could be "parents of young children".
of course, it could also be just "young children"; you have to use common sense + context to discern which is correct.

parents of young children, who often need to take time off work unexpectedly, benefit considerably from flex-time policies.
--> here, it is obvious from context that "who" = parents of young children.

parents of young children, who cannot take care of themselves, often need to take time off work unexpectedly.
--> here, it's equally clear that "who" just refers to young children this time.

----------------

in general, if the modifier is itself a clause (= something that contains a verb), then gmac won't allow "which" to have this function.

[tim]

Willy, Ron has posted about the Emily Dickinson problem elsewhere; you should look it up for more information. The short answer is that "which" will refer to something other than the noun right in front of the comma if that noun is ineligible for the "which" to apply to. Since you cannot use "which" to refer to a person, in this problem it must refer instead to the letters..

[Willy]

Willy, Ron has posted about the Emily Dickinson problem elsewhere; you should look it up for more information. The short answer is that "which" will refer to something other than the noun right in front of the comma if that noun is ineligible for the "which" to apply to. Since you cannot use "which" to refer to a person, in this problem it must refer instead to the letters..

Thank you Tim and Ron. You guys are awesome!

[tim]

thanks! :)

[sid090188]

Hello,

Please consider the following 2 sentences from Ron' videos:

1) The old capitol building in Benicia, which was the capital city of California, is a historic landmark.

2) The old capitol building in Benicia, which was built in under a year when the city was designated capital of California, is now a historic landmark.

Here it was mentioned that which in 1st sentence refers to Benicia.I agree.

But for the second sentence it was given that which refers to 'the old capital building in Benicia' because as per the meaning fo the sentence it is the building and not the city.But then this sentence is flawed.Isn't it? When the noun before which can stand as the antecedent for which, which certainly refers that noun.So as per this rule,which should refer to Benicia and not 'the old capitol building in Benicia.'Kindly explain.

[jlucero]

Hello,

Please consider the following 2 sentences from Ron' videos:

1) The old capitol building in Benicia, which was the capital city of California, is a historic landmark.

2) The old capitol building in Benicia, which was built in under a year when the city was designated capital of California, is now a historic landmark.

Here it was mentioned that which in 1st sentence refers to Benicia.I agree.

But for the second sentence it was given that which refers to 'the old capital building in Benicia' because as per the meaning fo the sentence it is the building and not the city.But then this sentence is flawed.Isn't it? When the noun before which can stand as the antecedent for which, which certainly refers that noun.So as per this rule,which should refer to Benicia and not 'the old capitol building in Benicia.'Kindly explain.

These critical modifier questions almost always come down to clear meaning. Take a look at the modifier in the middle- which was built in under a year when the city was designated capital of California. Now think about what that could refer to:

The building was built in under a year when the city was designated capital of California

or

Benicia was built in under a year when the city was designated capital of California.

If you wanted to try to say that Benicia was built when Benicia was designated the capital of California, it would be far better to say:

Benicia was built in under a year when it was designated capital of California.

So the modifier is more likely talking about the building than the city. That said, I don't love the sentence and think it's a little bit in the gray. If the modifier was something that more clearly could not refer to Benicia, I'd be more ok with it:

The old capitol building in Benicia, which is 200 feet tall and made out of marble, is now a historic landmark.

[sid090188]

Hi Joe,

So according to what you say if the noun before which cannot stand as the antecedent for which,then which can refer to something before that noun.Please correct me if I am wrong.

Also in the example which you provided :

The old capitol building in Benicia, which is 200 feet tall and made out of marble, is now a historic landmark.

Here again which could stand for Benicia (gramatically though not logically),so the above sentence is also flawed.

[tim]

it sounds like you have a correct understanding. when figuring out what "which" stands for, don't worry about whether things make sense, instead just figure out what the nearest eligible noun is..