Hi,
AndrewNYou got me this time right at the heart of my misunderstanding. Cheers to you!
I messed up between reality and fiction plot. Here, the use of 'some' is more of a 0/1 condition, as even a couple of instances of Californianas owning valuable properties is sufficient to fuel the creativity of the fiction writers. We do not need 'several' instances.
Also, the scope of the passage is limited only to 'literary depictions', which do not need to have any (significant) bearing with the ground reality. And the target group is only limited to those fiction writers.
Just the presence of a law won't fuel the creativity of the writers to romanticize the Californianas (that would be a very boring novel indeed!) - they actually would require some such elite Californianas holding those valuable properties to relate more to the common people.
My prior reasoning of 'inheritance' seems a boring motivation for such story plots. Unless it's established that Californianas did owe properties themselves, there is no strong reason to write such fiction novels of pursuing them just because a law guarantees them inheritance.
Test writers are indeed experts (on steroids).
Thanks again, Andrew. As a native speaker, you help bring out nuances that non-native speakers don't notice.
Hi
VeritasKarishma,
Really appreciate your response. Your response is apt and touches the exact same misunderstanding that Andrew pointed out in his last post.
You guys seriously have such a great command on the language and at the same time, are humble enough to take your time to patiently address the queries of random students on the forum. I am indeed grateful to you all.
Thanks again. Have a great day.
Posted from my mobile device