Correct Sentence: Despite the financial setbacks of the last

Question

Correct Sentence: Despite the financial setbacks of the last three years, Ms. Hanson is betting that there are still many East Coast  women   with considerable
capital   who are ready to redeploy part of it .

According to Aristotle SC, the above sentence is correct. But I want to understand the grammar rule:  when is a prepositional phrase allowed between a noun and the relative clause that modifies that noun?

daagh · Answer

Is this sentence correct? The opening modifier  ‘Despite the financial setbacks of the last three years’  seems to be modifying Ms. Hanson rather than  East Coast women , who are placed far distant from their modifier. Is this not a case of misplaced modifier?

As far the intervention of a prepositional phrase between a noun, and its modifying relative clause, I believe ther are no rules but the context that decides the issue, depending upon the prepositional phrase’s essentiality to the context. As you have rightly pointed out, when the relative clause modifies its logical noun rather than the postpositional noun, then I think this sentence is correct to that extent. Please remember that ‘capital’ also is a noun in this given case, but still irrelevant because, capital is not a noun that can be ready to re-deploy. Only people can do it.

abhicoolmax · Answer

Thanks a lot for the reply. Here is the question:

Despite the financial setbacks of the last three years, Ms. Hanson  bets that there are still many East Coast women with considerable capital that are ready to redeploy part of them .
A. bets that there are still many East Coast women with considerable capital that are ready to redeploy part of them
 B. is betting that there are still many East Coast women with considerable capital who are ready to redeploy part of it 
C. is betting that there are still many East Coast women having considerable capital who are ready to redeploy part of that D. has been betting that there were still many East Coast women with considerable capital who are ready to redeploy part of it
E. is betting that there will still be many East Coast women with considerable capital who would be ready to redeploy part of these

So, are you saying a relative clause can NEVER modify a propositional noun? Please help me understand, when can it do so? Any example if possible?

abhicoolmax · Answer

hi daagh, I realized something. Please tell me if I got it wrong. As we know there are 2 types of relative clause modifiers: 1. Essential - modifiers WITHOUT the COMMA, esp. that. But who, which, whom, etc could also be essential. 2. Non-essential - modifiers WITH the COMMA. All relative pronouns but "that". I got a question in my MGMAT test today; see sc-moon-part-of-earth-116058.html Note that the right solution is: Some scientists suggest that the moon was formed from part of the Earth that had perhaps been dislodged by a meteor . MGMAT explanation says: In "Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of part of the Earth , which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor. " - The relative pronoun “which” must refer to the immediately preceding noun, suggesting illogically in this case that “the Earth” was dislodged by a meteor. In "Some scientists suggest that the moon was formed from part of the Earth that had perhaps been dislodged by a meteor. " - The modifying phrase “that had perhaps been dislodged” correctly refers to “part of the Earth.” Base on all this, it seems to me that an ESSENTIAL MODIFIER can modify a noun, which could be followed "short" prepositional phrase, whereas a NON-ESSENTIAL MODIFIER MUST modify the noun it follows. Is my above conclusion justified? Is there some other interpretation of MGMAT's explanation that I am missing or over assuming? Thanks.

krishp84 · Answer

I would suggest 1st understand the meaning the sentence.
Then read the sentence cutting the prep. phrases to see if it is logically and grammatically correct.

Read it as - 
Some scientists suggest that the moon was formed from  part   of the Earth that had perhaps been dislodged by a meteor.

So it correctly modifies the part.....
Hope this makes sense.

abhicoolmax · Answer

Are you sure that striking of the preposition is the right way to think thorough this problem here? You might be correct, but I feel a bit skeptical.

Why can't your logic apply to the 1st option then? That is,
Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of  part   of the Earth ,  which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor.

That's why I thought the reasoning might perhaps be that Essential modifiers can modify the main noun that is followed by a prepositional phrase.

krishp84 · Answer

Can you post all the choices ?

In the example suggested above, there are 2 errors -

Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of  part   of the Earth ,  which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor. 
This is wrong.

WHICH always modifies the word touching it. 
WHICH is a non-essential modifier.

So I would read the sentence as :
Some scientists  suggest the  moon had been formed out of part of the  Earth , which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor.

meaning wise - Earth was dislodged by the meteor - Not part of the earth - again nonsense
another error - THAT missing after suggests -  suggests that   should be there.

Hope it makes sense now.

Modifiers are tricky, but the easy part is you can crack the code if you know the basics and read the meaning.  Cutting prep. phrases needs to be done only after understanding the meaning 
 First understand the meaning. Then apply the rules.  Cutting prep. phrases are meant to save you time and is NOT A RULE . 
...Not straight away like you do in Maths naturally.

abhicoolmax · Answer

Thanks krishp84, I think I understand but I will refer back to my MGMAT SC book again to see some of the core concepts if I am missing any.

krishp84

Can you post all the choices ?

If you see in my original post regarding this question, the post has the link

Here it is again: sc-moon-part-of-earth-116058.html

Thanks.

Here it is again: sc-moon-part-of-earth-116058.html Thanks.

krishp84 · Answer

Please check that post, I had already answered your question there.

daagh · Answer

I only referred to the case you quoted. I will not say that a relative clause can NEVER modify a propositional noun. It can. 
For eg: The members of the team that won the world cup took a victory lap.

Here what does the term  that  in the relative clause  ‘that won the world cup’  refer to – the members or the team -? Obviously the team and not the members. Right? 
So it is the logical context that decides than any fixed rule, I suppose. I am not aware of any MGMAT rules since I have never read MGMAT stuff, except in references as this.

daagh · Answer

To add to the befuddlement of the moon issue, let me ask

"Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of part ‘of the Earth’, which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor."
 ‘ of the earth’,  - is this phrase an inessential modifier that can be dispensed with? 
If I strike off the of the  ‘of the Earth’,  the sentence will be 
"Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of part, which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor.
Now the question is whether it was formed from the part  of earth, any other planet, or the sun itself . Doesn’t it render the meaning quite ambiguous? Then are we right in saying tht it is an inessential modifier?

Secondly I would also think, to use ‘ that ’ in the place of ‘ , which’  is also incorrect since a restrictive relative pronoun cannot flout the touch rule even as much as the non-restrictive  ,which  . The best way to solve this issue is to avoid the relative pronouns per se and instead use a participle. Look at the following sentence 
"Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of part of the Earth, dislodged perhaps by a meteor."
 A participle separated by a comma need not modify the noun or word before but can modify any logical part of the preceding part. Any takers?

Correct Sentence: Despite the financial setbacks of the last

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards