In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are proh

From OG

Logical predication; Rhetorical construction

It is difficult to tell which parts of this sentence go together because of errors and confusion in the underlined portion. Living allowances is the counterpart of paychecks, so it is better to say governments . . . substitute living allowances for the paychecks of their employees because it makes the substitution clearer. This change also makes it easier to correct the modification error that appears in the phrase assigned by them, which incorrectly modifies paychecks rather than employees. Th e modifying clause who have been assigned clearly describes employees and fits into the remaining part of the sentence, to the United Nations.

A Assigned by them incorrectly and illogically modifies paychecks.
B Correct. In this sentence, the meaning is clearer, because paychecks is separated from employees. The relative clause clearly modifies employees.
C Having been assigned illogically modifies governments.
D The correct construction is substitutes x for y, not substitutes x in place of y. The construction following paychecks is wordy and awkward.
E The correct construction is substitutes x for y, not substitutes x in place of y. The construction following employees is wordy and awkward.
The correct answer is B.

Please give me kudos if you like the post

ing is a versatile modifier when comma + ing is used it modifes the clause when there is no comma it modifies the Noun. Hope it is clear.

In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them - Modifier assigned by them illogically modifies paychecks ; Pronoun them refers to government and means that paychecks are assigned to the United Nations
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned - Correct
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned - having been assigned refers to subject government and is illogical
(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned - substitute and in place of redundant - Idiom error ; for those of them is ambiguous
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them - substitute and in place of redundant - Idiom error ; Wordy

Answer B

421. In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employees’ paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.
(A) for their employees’ paychecks, assigned by them
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned
(D) in place of their employees’ paychecks, for those of them assigned
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them

ing is the most powerful modifier. It modifies the whole clause. NOT just the one it touches.

SPLIT 1) "SUBSTITUE X FOR Y" IS THE CORRECT USAGE. D AND E ARE OUT.

SPLIT2) "ASSIGNED" MODIFIES PAYCHECKS IN A, THIS IS THE WRONG MEANING. A IS OUT.

SPLIT3) "HAVING BEEN" IS STRANGE AND USED AS LAST RESORT IF THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION. C IS OUT.

Saurabh

Yes, there is no sequencing. The perks are given as and when the assignment occurs. "Having been" also gives an implication of causality. However, it is not as if, because they have been assigned, they get the benefits.

In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them ( this sentence wrongly suggests that paychecks were assigned by the government to the UN, thus, changing the meaning. )
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned (correct; sentence uses correct modifier "who" to modify the employees working for the UN; the sentence means that living allowances were substituted for paychecks of their employees- employees who were assigned to the UN)
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned ( modifier error, having been doesn't correctly modify employees )
(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned (this sentence incorrectly means that paychecks were assigned to the UN and the use of "them" creates confusion is them refereeing to the paychecks, government or employees? )
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them(Who?) ( doesn't make sense)

Sure, you can try substituting they/them to find out whether it is the subject or the object.
They have been assigned to the UN. (Subject 'they' so we use 'who')
The UN should call them. (Object 'them' so we use 'whom' such as ... the employees whom the UN should call)

Just needed some clarity on a rule (if its correct) :

The modifier "verb-ing" always modifies the SUBJECT of the sentence :

[b]The batter hit the ball out of the baseball park, using all his might.

Here even though the noun "baseball park" is closer, this type of modifier takes the SUBJECT.
[/b]


Is the explanation in bold correct?

Hi!
Calling all experts for explaining the difference between B & D.
one diffidence is Idiom usage.. any other difference please ?

egmat
magoosh
veritas
chetan4u

thanks

Apart from idiomatic error, 2nd thing issue I see is "employees' paychecks, for those of them assigned".
What does those/them refer to. Not clear.

In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them (who is them referring to,we have pronoun ambiguity here)
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned Correct answer with clear reference and correct meaning.
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned (having been assigned is wrongly used.)
(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned(those is pronoun ambiguity,it can be referring to civil servants or the paychecks)
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them (to have been is incorrect)

Dear Team

" ; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations. "

clauses separated by comma be independent, shouldn't this be incorrect above as however will make it ambiguous ?

Please help.

As per my understanding, C is wrong because "Having Been" is used to show sequencing but the sentence does not have any such sequencing.

daagh chetan2u - your thoughts?

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them --- meaning issue (paychecks are not getting assigned)
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned - relative modifier "who" correctly modifies employees
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned - reason above
(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned -- Them nonsensically refers to employees
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them -- meaning issue- who has done the assignment

In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.


Sometimes its nice to solve a questions using the 2/3 split especially when the split is screaming at your face!
the split is between FOR vs IN--- probably indicates an idiom error!

the correct idiom is "substitute X for Y".. therefore we can eliminate options D and E!

(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned- this sentence also has a meaning error: we are not substituting paychecks with other paychecks-- and those is ambiguous it can refer to employees or paychecks!

(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them- usually to-verbs indicate an intention and there is not intention to assign to the United Nations its more like a fact!!- meaning error

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them--- okay so verb-ed modifiers usually tend to modify the noun before them so what this sentence says is that paychecks were assigned by someone to the united nations--- ambiguity and illogical meaning!

(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned- "who have been assigned" relative pronoun modifier modifying employees and since there is no ambiguity in the meaning- we have a winner!

(C) for the paychecks of their employees, "having been assigned"--- okay so "verb-ing phrases either modify the action in the previous clause when separated by a comma(usually to indicate a cause and effect relation) and when not separated by a comma usually act as adjectives that modify the noun before them or after depending of where the verb-in word/phrase is present!--- so this option primarily illogically indicates that the substitution happened because of being assigned to the UN- illogical--- and we do not know what is assigned to the UN?

(A) for their employee's paychecks, assigned by them
paychecks assigned?
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned
(D) in place of their employee's paychecks, for those of them assigned
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them

IMO B