OG Verbal Ed. 11th SC Q. 79

[Hei]

Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.

A.
B. Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
C. Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
D. sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
E. sediments from the Baltic Sea, with the growth of industrial activity there

[StaceyKoprince]

Let us know if you have a specific question - that always helps us to target an answer.

In the initial problem "which" indicates a noun modifier. The sediments alone are not "consistent with the growth of industrial activity" however - it's the "large concentrations" of these sediments. So that's a problem. In addition, the sentence uses the pronoun "there" but pronouns need to refer to nouns. The noun it should be referring to is the "area around the Baltic Sea" but this is not actually contained in the sentence. Even the words "Baltic Sea" are being used as an adjective to describe the type of sediment.

B has a similar, though even worse, problem - "where" introduces a noun modifier and should indicate a place but sediments are not a place.

C says "its growth of industrial activity" - what is "its" referring to? Logically, it should be the area around the Baltic Sea, but a noun indicating such an area is not present in the sentence.

D is right.

E has two main problems. "With the growth of industrial activity there" doesn't mean anything. And where is "there"? THe only location mentioned is the Baltic Sea... but the growth of industrial activity didn't happen in the Sea. It happened in the area around it.

[Hei]

Sorry for not stating what I don't understand.

I don't understand why D is grammatically correct.

"Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of sediments from the Baltic Sea" is an independent clause.
I know that:
- an independent clause + a dependent clause
- an independent clause + a modifier that modifies the last "thing" of the independent clause
are grammatically correct.

When I read through the choices, I just crossed out D because I thought that it wasn't grammatically correct.

What kind of sentence structure does D present? I want to know so that I won't cross out next time.

Thanks in advance. :)

[RonPurewal]

Hi -

First, read the discussion in this thread, if you've not already seen it.

Notice, as illustrated in that thread, that 'the last thing in the independent clause' is allowed to comprise a noun along with an entire prepositional phrase describing that noun. That's exactly what happens here: 'the last thing' happens to be the ENTIRE PHRASE 'large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper 20cm of sediments from the Baltic Sea'. Notice in particular that ALL of the words after 'concentrations' are prepositional phrases, and are therefore acceptable as portions of 'the last thing'.

This idea can be frustrating, because it lends ambiguity - after all, it's also possible that the 'last thing' could be the Baltic Sea itself.

Incidentally, the fact that the referenced post contains a 'which' clause, whereas this sentence contains an appositive (a modifier that's just a noun phrase), is irrelevant - the 'last thing' concept is equally applicable to both.

[Hei]

Hi Ron, the thread you mentioned is very helpful.

One more question, I thought that "findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area" should become "findings that are consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area", which I think that people call it, "summative modifier".

The main reason that I crossed out D was that I thought that "findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area" was not grammatically correct without "that are". I think that I am wrong?

Thanks. :)

[StaceyKoprince]

Summative modifiers don't require us to use "that" (though they often do). Basically, you need a comma, a noun, and a modifier. That modifier might include "that" or "which" (or the equivalent) but might also just be a prepositional phrase (as we have here - consistent with).

[Saurabh Malpani]

Ron,

In the followign question from OG 10:

119. 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 busi ness 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

C )significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, already with business costs of

D )significant in compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, and already costing business

E) significant in compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, and already costs business

In the correct answer B effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already cost business " WHICH" seems to refer to Effects correct? so when we can eliminate the prep phrase in this sentence why can we have which refering to "COncentrations" in options A in the Original sentence posted?

Please explain!

Hi -

First, read the discussion in this thread, if you've not already seen it.

Notice, as illustrated in that thread, that 'the last thing in the independent clause' is allowed to comprise a noun along with an entire prepositional phrase describing that noun. That's exactly what happens here: 'the last thing' happens to be the ENTIRE PHRASE 'large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper 20cm of sediments from the Baltic Sea'. Notice in particular that ALL of the words after 'concentrations' are prepositional phrases, and are therefore acceptable as portions of 'the last thing'.

This idea can be frustrating, because it lends ambiguity - after all, it's also possible that the 'last thing' could be the Baltic Sea itself.

Incidentally, the fact that the referenced post contains a 'which' clause, whereas this sentence contains an appositive (a modifier that's just a noun phrase), is irrelevant - the 'last thing' concept is equally applicable to both.

[Saurabh Malpani]

19. In addition to having more protein -than wheat does, the protein in rice is higher quality than that in wheat, with more of the amino acids essential to
the human diet.

A) the protein in rice is higher quality than that in
B )rice has protein of higher quality than that in
C )the protein in rice is higher in quality than it is in
D )rice protein is higher in quality than it is in
E) rice has a protein higher in quality than

here Irrespective for Correct choice what roles does the Non Underlined part of the sentence play: "with more of the amino acids essential to the human diet"

In my opinion it's modyfying Protien. Is that correct? I believe the this emphasize the "Last Thing" concept.

Please confirm

Saurabh Malpani

[RonPurewal]

In the penultimate post, you're right: the reference could be either to "effects of drug and alcohol abuse" or just to "drug and alcohol abuse". It's up to context to determine which - although, in my experience, it's usually the whole prepositional phrase in problems like these. But DON'T blindly follow that as a rule; check the context in each problem to make sure your choice makes sense.

The last example doesn't work on the Last Thing principle at all; the Last Thing principle is pretty much limited to relative pronouns, like 'that' and 'which'. General modifier phrases like this one usually refer to the SUBJECT or PRINCIPAL ACTION in the previous clause:
'James ran through the woods, banging against bushes and branches.'
Here, 'ran' is being modified (the principal action). You could also make a decent case that James is being modified. In no way is 'woods' being modified.

Same story in the last problem.