Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun

Hi eGMAT/Experts,

I would like to build my understanding more on the above Red colored part.

Example 1
When we say that the earth cannot gather information, it means that it is illogical and hence we should move further to see if we have any other noun that could have been modified by the entity "gathering information.....". By doing so, we found the noun - great navigators and hence the phrase "gathering..." must be modifying "great navigators"

Now, taking the same concept forward to the below example--

Example 2
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus

As the above poster correctly mentions that the eruption of Vesuvius cannot happen in the two letters, hence the modification is illogical and we should move further to see if there is any valid verb/noun to whom it can modify. Here, "Wrote" is the verb that is getting modified correctly by the phrase - in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

Question is - Why we are saying that choice 2 is illogical, however going by the same framework and logic makes the first example correct. Please respond.

Thanks
H

Hi Shraddha,
Can you please confirm if my understanding is right on Sunspots question in OG 13.
Sunspots,vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear as dark spots on the sun`s surface, which have never been sighted on the sun`s poles or equators.

can we say that which here points to dark spots ? because on the sun`s surface is a noun modifier ?

Hi Vigneshceg,

Your understanding is correct. You can do a double check with the verb present in the Relative Clause. The Verb is Plural, so it must refer to plural noun. Hence, Dark spots. More often than not(90% cases), you have the helping verb that will clarify the noun that the relative pronoun is referring to. I have given an analysis in this thread only, you may take a look on it.

Thanks
H

Thanks for the reply H.
I saw your previous posts and was informative.
To be honest, I am confused. I thought in the blah blah modified the verb wrote.
We must have more clarity and direction on the thought.

Please refer to the one written on "Feb 25, 2013 8:38 am". I think, you have seen the post written yesterday by me, that is a doubt posted by me not a learning...

Hi Heman2727,

The first thing we should keep in mind is that the rule discussed in this article pertains ONLY to Noun Modifiers.

Another thing I would like to bring to your attention is the nature of prepositional phrases. They can modify Nouns as well as Verb. So we must be very careful to ascertain what it should logically modify and then make sure that its placement is correct.

If you study the GMAT sentence that you have provided, the prepositional phrase “on the branches” modifies the action denoted by “sleeping”. Where do monkeys sleep? On the branches. So this prepositional phrase is not part of “monkeys”. This is the reason why, all the relative pronouns after “branches” refer to “branches”. The relative pronoun cannot jump over those prepositional phrases that do not modify the same noun entity as the relative pronoun modifier modifies.

Study these official examples:
1. Although she had been known as an effective legislator first in the Texas Senate and later in the United States House of Representatives, Barbara Jordan did not become a nationally recognized figure until 1974, when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were televised nationwide.

2. Emily Dickinson’s letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber her letters to anyone else.

This is the reason why choice D is the correct answer here because “with arms and legs hanging” can logically only refer to monkeys.

Now let’s come to your next question.
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

In this sentence, we must first ascertain what “in two letters” is supposed to modify. It should modify “wrote the only eyewitness account”. Since prepositional phrases can refer to nouns also, incorrect placements make the modification ambiguous. Here, “wrote” is separated by “in two letter” by so many noun entities. This makes it appropriate to place this prepositional phrase closer to the entity it is supposed to modify to avoid any room for ambiguous.

So the original sentence still leaves a little room for ambiguous, but not the correct answer where “in two letters” has been placed in the beginning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Himanshu,

If you read my explanation to Heman2727 on the OG 12 question, you should get your answer. As far as the GMAT Prep question of "gathering..." is concerned, it is really an uncommon question where we go by the logic and kind of overlook the grammar. However, this is not a common practice.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Vignesh,

This is the sentence that you present:
Sunspots, vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear as dark spots on the sun`s surface, which have never been sighted on the sun`s poles or equators.

Now let me present another variation of this sentence:
Sunspots, vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear on the sun`s surface as dark spots, which have never been sighted on the sun`s poles or equators.

You must keep in mind what the prepositional phrase “on the sun’s surface” modifies. It modifies the verb “appears”. It is not the part of the noun “dark spots”. This is the reason why, in the first sentence, “which” cannot jump over “on the sun’s surface” to modify “dark spots”. In the second sentence, there is no need of jumping over because “which” is placed next to dark spots.

You may read the part of the article where to talks about when the slightly far away modification does not stand.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Raghu,

Noun Modifiers, in this case the relative pronoun "which", can only jump over prepositional phrases preceding them when those prepositional phrases modify the same entity as the noun modifier after the prepositional phrase does. If the preceding prepositional phrase modifies any other entity, then the noun modifier cannot jump over that prepositional. In that case it will modify the immediate preceding noun.

This is what is happening in the sentence that you have provided. "in the coming months" refers to the verb "would provide". This prepositional phrase is not part of "sovereign debts". So, "which" cannot jump over "in the coming months" and modify "sovereign debts".

Now the rules that you have cited also stand correct. But that rule applies to those sentence where the modification is correct. In the above sentence, the modification at the first is incorrect. So there is no question of application of those rules here.

Let's study a set of correct example sentences to see the application of these rules:

1. The box of nails that is made up of wood is in the shelf.
2. The box of nails that are rusted is is in the shelf.

In sentence 1, since the verb "is" after "that" is singular, "that" refers to "box" even if it is preceded by another noun entity "nails". The noun modifier "that" can jump over "of nails" because "of nails" also refers to the "the box." In sentence 2, the verb after "that" is "are", a plural verb. Hence, it needs a plural subject. So that refers to the immediate preceding plural noun "nails".

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Shraddha,
Firstly,I would like to thank you for the article shared.I have another doubt with the question where signifcance of which is specified.

Letters are not the doer of the verb-ing 'outnumbering'

Is this another reason for the original sentence being wrong.

Also please answer to the below question.

John,a resident of Lake City and an employee of The Bell Company,is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for making international calls.

A)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

B)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,leading to a lowering of rates for

C)which is currently working on a new project to revolutionize the telecommunication industry and also lead to a lower rates for

D)who is currently working on a new project in the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

E)has been currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry as well as lower the rates for.

Hi Sirish,

Comma + verb-ing modifiers present either the HOW aspect of the preceding action or the result. The reason why “outnumbering” is not correct is that Emily did not wrote the letters to SHD by outnumbering” her letters. Also, “outnumbering” is not the effect of Emily’s writing to SHD. Hence, use of “outnumbering” is not correct.

Now let’s look at the sentence that you have presented:

John, a resident of Lake City and an employee of The Bell Company, is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for making international calls.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

John is working on a project. This project will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. This industry will lead to decrease in rates for international calls. But it does not make sense to say that the industry will lead to decrease in the rates for international calls.

ERROR ANALYSIS:

From our meaning analysis, we know that it does not make sense to say that the industry will lead to decrease in the rates for international calls. Hence, use of “which” is incorrect in this sentence.

PoE:

A) is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for: Incorrect for the reason stated above.

B) is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, leading to a lowering of rates for: Correct. Comma + Verb-ing modifiers correctly presents how the new project will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. It will do so by lowering the rates for international calls.

C) which is currently working on a new project to revolutionize the telecommunication industry and also lead to a lower rates for: Incorrect.
1. “which” illogically refers to “The Bell Company”.
2. Absence of verb for the subject “John” leads to fragment error.

D) who is currently working on a new project in the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for: Incorrect. Same “which” modification error as in choice A and fragment error as in choice C.

E) has been currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry as well as lower the rates for: Incorrect.
1. Use of present perfect tense is incorrect.
2. The new project will do just one thing. It will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. The forced parallel list changes the meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hello Shradha,

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

Can you please explain the usage of modifiers in this question

Regards,
Veenu

Hi Veenu,

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

This one is very interesting. The key to solve this one is to understand the intended logical meaning of the sentence. So let’s do that.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

Economic recession can result from falling employment rates. By the way, the employment rates
fall is triggered by a drop in investment. Coming back to what we were talking about, the falling investment rates cause cuts in consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

Now that we understand the meaning of the question, I would like you to take a stab at this question. Analyze yourself the role of various modifiers in each answer choice and find the correct answer. Post your analysis here so that I can understand your analysis.

So all the very best.

Looking forward to your analysis.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Shraddha,
I have a doubt in OG 12 #21

Neuroscientists, having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood, are now drawing solid conclusions about how the human brain grows and how babies acquire language.

If I am not wrong, in this sentence "over the past twenty years" modifies "having amassed" and "about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood" modifies "a wealth of knowledge". In that case the noun modifier "about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood" is modifying a far away noun phrase ("a wealth of knowledge") separated from the modifier by another phrase ("over the past twenty years") that is not modifying the noun phrase. Can such modification be possible?

Since there is no other better option is this an exception to the rule for noun modifiers modifying far away nouns?
Thanks,
Sarmistha

Hi Sarmistha,

What we are dealing with in this sentence are prepositional phrases. Now no fixed prepositional phrases can be said to be noun modifiers or verb modifiers. Their placement in the sentence really makes them either a noun modifier or a verb modifier. A prepositional phrase placed in a particular place in the sentence can acts as a noun modifier, but if we change its place and put it closer to a verb, then it may act as a verb modifier.

This is the reason why the rules of noun modifiers cannot be extended to the prepositional phrases that act as noun modifiers.

Once again, this is no exception to the rule. we must understand why certain rule is applicable to certain entities and not applicable to other entities is that other entities do not function in the same way as those on which the rule is applicable.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Shraddha- Can you please confirm whether OA is C ? Bit confused between C and E...!

Is it an official question?

Hi bagdbmba,

I came across two versions of this question, both of which contain the same sentence. However, the options differ in both of them.

IMO, Option E is the correct answer for this question.

No. This is not an official question. I believe this is an mgmat question.

Regards,
Krishna