marshpa wrote:
While depressed property values can hurt some large investors,they are potentially devastating for homeowners, whose equity-in many cases representing a life’s savings-can plunge or even disappear.
(A) they are potentially devastating for homeowners,whose
(B) they can potentially devastate homeowners in that their
(C) for homeowners they are potentially devastating,because their
(D) for homeowners,it is potentially devastating in that their
(E) it can potentially devastate homeowners,whose
I have some questions-How they has clear referant? Please post your answers while answering my question as well.
Here is my strategy for this tackling this question.
Elimination of "Grammatical error">> "two ambigous referrants>> "one ambigous referrant"
D,E --- Sub-Verb agreemtn problem "it" -singlular(must be plural)
B,C - they/their are ambigous.
B -- they can potentially devastate homeowners
(replace "they" with possible antencedents)
= they[large investors] can potentially devastate homeowners
= they[depressed property] can potentially devastate homeowners
(Both above two statements are sounds ok (Forget above orignal full setences) and these two options are possible --->
So "they" is ambigous here.)
A -- they are potentially devastating for homeowners,whose
(replace "they" with possible antencedents)
=they [depressed property values] are potentially devastating for homeowners,whose
=they [large investors] are potentially devastating for homeowners,whose
(Is second setence sound good?.. No.. you can't say
Large investors are devasting for homeowners.
large investors can devastate homeowners --(this sounds ok --as stated in "B")
) --> its not logical...
they here clearly refer to --> "depressed property values"
Will go for A.
_________________
Your attitude determines your altitude
Smiling wins more friends than frowning
close
