United States Senator

[vaibhavsharma1988]

gmatprep 1

Question :United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the democratic party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the democratic Senatorial Committee.

A) that included
B) which includes
C) including
D) some of which were
E) among them being

correct answer : C

my question : why option D) is wrong. It uses a correct subgroup modifier (as given in manhattan sentence correction guide - MODIFIERS) to define a part of the larger group (few posts of the several posts that senator was appointed for).

[RonPurewal]

gmatprep 1

Question :United States Senator Daniel Inouye was appointed to several posts within the democratic party during his first term, that included assistant majority whip and vice-chair of the democratic Senatorial Committee.

A) that included
B) which includes
C) including
D) some of which were
E) among them being

correct answer : C

my question : why option D) is wrong. It uses a correct subgroup modifier (as given in manhattan sentence correction guide - MODIFIERS) to define a part of the larger group (few posts of the several posts that senator was appointed for).

(d) falls into the "WHICH" family of modifiers.
the modifiers in that family generally refer to the noun that immediately precedes the comma.

we've seen some exceptions to this rule, in which these modifiers refer to a noun phrase of the form "noun1 + preposition + noun2" (see here post31162.html#p31162), but we've never seen this rule extended to the form above, which is "noun1 + preposition + noun2 + preposition + noun3". therefore, i think you can take it as a pretty solid rule that "which" can never stand for such a thing.

[alexei600]

Dear Instructor,
Why B is wrong. Term, which includes.
Can't a term include things. Or is it the tense, which makes "B" wrong.
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Instructor,
Why B is wrong. Term, which includes.
Can't a term include things.

well, yeah, but a term clearly can't include things like "assistant majority whip" and "vice-chair".

analogy:
you can say the last twenty years included the duration of my friend's first marriage, but you can't say the last twenty years included my friend's first wife.

it's not enough for a sentence to be grammatically correct; the sentence has to make sense!

[JustinCKN]

Dear instructor Ron:
Sorry to open this old thread.
your explanation about why option D is wrong is that
(d) falls into the "WHICH" family of modifiers.
the modifiers in that family generally refer to the noun that immediately precedes the comma.
we've seen some exceptions to this rule, in which these modifiers refer to a noun phrase of the form "noun1 + preposition + noun2" (see here post31162.html#p31162), but we've never seen this rule extended to the form above, which is "noun1 + preposition + noun2 + preposition + noun3". therefore, i think you can take it as a pretty solid rule that "which" can never stand for such a thing.

However I find out that the example you cited https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p31162 just violate the grammar you mentioned .
In the example,Barbara Jordan did not become a nationally recognized figure until 1974, when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were televised nationwide.
which refer to hearings.
However " hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, " the form is noun1+preposition+noun2+preposition+noun3" ,which can refer to the noun1. And it is the correct answer.
WHY.
Thanks advanced!
JustinCKN.

[RonPurewal]

interesting -- noted.

as would be expected for something so unusual, that problem can be solved fairly readily on other grounds. but, still, nice catch.
have you seen any others? if not, i think you'd agree that it would be unwise to alter how we teach that whole general concept, just because of one example... O_o

[thanghnvn]

what we learn from this problem is that
a prepostion, specifically here , including, can modifies a far noun.
though which clause can also modifies a far noun, prepostion is prefered in this case.

I think this quesiton is at higher level because it dose not test the basic things.

[thanghnvn]

I think which clause can not jump over adverb to modify a far noun while a preposition can do so.

[JustinCKN]

interesting -- noted.

as would be expected for something so unusual, that problem can be solved fairly readily on other grounds. but, still, nice catch.
have you seen any others? if not, i think you'd agree that it would be unwise to alter how we teach that whole general concept, just because of one example... O_o

Hi. Ron
I'm so excited to receive your reply. I am your keen follower.I have learned so many precious experience from your detailed analysis.
In regard to this issue, I can regard it as a exception to the general concept and focus on other main problems to solve it.
Thanks sincerely.
JustinCKN.

[RonPurewal]

yep.

you're welcome.

[aflaamM589]

Is E incorrect only because of being?
(Being used as modifier is mostly i.e 99.99% incorrect)
Thanks in advance

[RonPurewal]

"99.99% incorrect" LOL. either something is wrong or it isn't.

choice E uses an __ing modifier construction that doesn't actually exist!

[aflaamM589]

I meant to say in 99% of the cases : )

choice E uses an __ing modifier construction that doesn't actually exist!

Didn't get it.
Can you elaborate it a little.
Thank you very much for your time.

[RonPurewal]

that kind of modifier -- prep + "them" + __ing -- is a thing that has no precedent in any of the other official problems (and for which i can't seem to create a legitimate example, either).

still, it's probably much easier to eliminate that choice on the grounds that it's clearly inferior to the correct answer. (this was almost certainly the problem writers' intention in creating this choice.)

[aflaamM589]

that kind of modifier -- prep + "them" + __ing -- is a thing that has no precedent in any of the other official problems (and for which i can't seem to create a legitimate example, either).

still, it's probably much easier to eliminate that choice on the grounds that it's clearly inferior to the correct answer. (this was almost certainly the problem writers' intention in creating this choice.)

Awesome stuff as usual.
Thanks a million.
Have a nice day.