the use of that

[yuex700]

The use of lie detectors is based ... [copyright text removed]


The OA is A

The answer explanations said [that] refer to [reactions],but as an noun modifier, it should be placed as close to the antecedent as possible, and the only except noted by Manhattan Prep is [which].

I wonder if the answer means [that] can also refer to the main noun of the nearest noun phrase instead of the nearest noun?

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

You haven't quite understood the rule about noun modifiers correctly. The principle here is that noun modifiers should be placed as close as possible to the noun they modify. This rule applies to 'which', 'that', and other noun modifiers too. The rule isn't actually ever broken - we still try to place the modifier as close as possible - but things become more complicated when (as in the problem you cite) there are multiple modifiers. Here we have three modifiers of 'reactions', they are: 'emotional', 'in an individual', and 'that create...'. We can't have them all touching the word 'reactions'!

Have a look at this post: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ors#p70134

[YuanqiZ223]

I have a question about the third choice:

The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses.

Why is this choice wrong? I think v-ing can modify the noun before/after it, and since "in an individual" is another modifier, I believe "creating...." can describe "reactions". If "that" can modify "reactions", then why not "creating"?

thank you

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

Consider the difference between these two kinds of noun modifier. We have NOUN -ing (For example: 'I saw a bird flying in the sky') and NOUN that (For example: 'I saw a bird that was flying in the sky'). In these examples the modifiers are basically the same, no big difference.

But how about these examples:
(1) I bought a computer that broke the next day. (Fine)
(2) I bought a computer breaking the next day. (Not fine)

You might be able to see that (2) is not a good sentence because the order of the actions is unclear. It sort of sounds like the computer was already breaking when I bought it. We've got the same problem in answer choice (C) above.

[YuanqiZ223]

Thank you so much! I think (2) has a problem because v-ing must be in the same time frame as the major verb. There "breaking" happens "the next day", so it can't have the same time frame as "bought". However, here "lying produces emotional reactions" can happen concurrently as "reactions create responses", and I don't feel that order matters a lot here. Just as I don't feel the order of "I saw a bird" and "the bird flys" matters.

In addition, I also noticed that the comment for C is that "This construction is less successful at clarifying the chain of events because creating seems to refer back to lying; if used as a participial, creating would have to be preceded by a comma."

Why does "creating" refer back to "lying"?

Besides, I actually feel a bit odd to hear "emotional reactions create unconscious physiological responses". I thought only "an individual" can do that...

Thank you so much for your time!

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

No need to quote my whole post in your response - it's shown above your message in the thread in any case.

here "lying produces emotional reactions" can happen concurrently as "reactions create responses", and I don't feel that order matters a lot here

The words 'in turn' show that order does, indeed, matter here.

In addition, I also noticed that the comment for C is that "This construction is less successful at clarifying the chain of events because creating seems to refer back to lying; if used as a participial, creating would have to be preceded by a comma."

Is this taken from the explanation in the OG? If so, I warn you that these explanations are full of inconsistencies and confusing explanations; I'm not sure about this myself. I suggest that you look at our explanation in the Navigator app in the Atlas Center.

Besides, I actually feel a bit odd to hear "emotional reactions create unconscious physiological responses". I thought only "an individual" can do that...

The meaning of the sentence is that lie detectors work by picking up small physical clues that are the result of emotional reactions. So, in this context, it's the emotional reactions that create the physiological responses. Of course, we could have a long conversation about the philosophy of causation (a fascinating topic) but that's not necessary to solve this problem.

I've just noticed that this problem is from the Official Guide, i.e. a copyright resource, so I have to remove the problem text, apologies.