"plural X + preposition + Y, which have" - which refers X?

[RonPurewal]

Sure.

[ZHUJ908]

the big problem with choice (e) is that the modifier creates an unacceptable change of meaning.
if you have
dark spots on the sun's surface, which have never been sighted...
then the problem is that the "which" modifier is actually talking about the spots described in the previous clause. in other words, this version of the sentence is inadvertently talking about the same spots seen on the sun's surface -- in other words, those SAME spots have not been seen on the poles or equator.
this is not the intended meaning. instead, the sentence is simply meant to say that the vortices in general have been seen on the surface of the sun, but that the same vortices in general have not been seen on the poles or at the equator.

the correct answer does not have this issue.
in the correct answer, you have a compound verb construction (are visible ... but have never been seen ...). the subject of this entire verb construction is "sunspots" (in general), as intended.

Sorry to interrupt, but I am still confused:
Why it has to be "parallelism"?

I mean, you mentioned that Choice E " is simply meant to say that the vortices in general have been seen on the surface of the sun, but that the same vortices in general have not been seen on the poles or at the equator." But it can make sense too. In other words, sentence E means the sunspots appear as dark spots on surface, but have never been sighted on poles.

Please let me know.
Thanks a lot ..( My question seems so stupid...)

[RonPurewal]

there are additional meaning issues, too:

1/
these need to be separate observations:
i/ they appear in xxxx sort of way
BUT, ii/ they have never been sighted at xxxx place.
if you use the modifier, then you're implying that "...which have never been sighted at place xxxx" is part of how these things appear. that doesn't make sense.

[RonPurewal]

2/
"which" modifiers apply ONLY to the noun or noun+prep+noun in front of them. "which" modifiers specifically DO NOT relate to, and are NOT qualified by, the rest of the sentence that precedes the noun (or noun+prep+noun).

so, here, "which..." would be modifying "dark spots on the sun's surface".

this would imply that "dark spots on the sun's surface" (ANY kind of dark spots) have never been seen in those locations.
while that's not impossible, it is clearly not the intended message of this sentence.

[ZHUJ908]

there are additional meaning issues, too:

1/
these need to be separate observations:
i/ they appear in xxxx sort of way
BUT, ii/ they have never been sighted at xxxx place.
if you use the modifier, then you're implying that "...which have never been sighted at place xxxx" is part of how these things appear. that doesn't make sense.

got it ! thanks for your help !!!

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[NeetuJ81]

Hi Ron,

I eliminated A because I thought present perfect tense doesn't make sense in this sentence and simple past tense would suffice. I was wrong, obviously but I don't understand why.

[RonPurewal]

even if you thought that, it's a non-issue—there are no choices with that verb in simple past (= "...were never sighted").

[RonPurewal]

in any case, no, the simple past would be wrong, since we're talking about something that has never happened—UP TO NOW—but that could still conceivably happen.

if you use the simple past for something like this, you are implying that this event IS NO LONGER POSSIBLE.

Madonna has never performed in Tucson, Arizona. (madonna is still alive)
Elvis Presley never performed in Tucson, Arizona. (elvis is no longer alive, so this is now impossible)

[JaneJ542]

That's a good question. I thought of all the examples that came to mind, and here's the pattern I found.

If you just have "(al)though + adjective", it should come in one of the following 2 places:

1/
In front of the entire sentence
(Al)though exhausted from work, Sarah still played with the dogs for two hours when she got home.

2/
After the subject (usually I've seen just "though" here, not "although")
The two men, though not trained as pilots, were able to land the plane safely.

I can't think of any legitimate sentences that place it after the original sentence, so that seems to be the problem.

Thanks!!!!

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[jiajingz990]

Please help! Ron Sir!
I have seen your explanation that choice C&D is wrong because the although-clause is after the original sentence. I am still confused with that.Could I complete the sentence like this: Sunspots, vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear on the surface of the Sun as dark spots although(sunspots were) never sighted at/although sunspots have never been sighted at...It seems like that the although omits the subject and verb?

Thanks in advance!

[RonPurewal]

Could I complete the sentence like this:

^^ i can't tell what you are asking here.
are you asking whether you can make up words that aren't actually there, and pretend those words are there? ...if so, then, no, you can't do that.