"comma + that " & "no comma + which"

This topic has expert replies

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:52 pm
mmslf75 wrote:Can I use this as an example under

(1) you're describing a process or condition that persisted up until some given time in the past;

jesse had flown almost a million miles during those two years.
In 1997, the figure had grown blah blah .....
if you're going to do this, you should ALWAYS post the WHOLE CONTEXT.
at the very least you should post the entire sentence in which you saw this construction; if it's a gmat (or gmat-like) problem, you should also post the answer choices.
the fragment that you've posted here is not enough context.

by the way, if the sentence read by 1997, ... then idiomatic usage would require the past perfect in most cases. (analogously, if it's since 1997, ..., then you MUST use the present perfect)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:54 am
Followed by:1 members

by CaptainM » Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:13 pm
lunarpower wrote:
mmslf75 wrote:Thanks, ron

you COULD conceivably use a "which" modifier, to modify the pension liabilities themselves. but, if you're going to do that, you don't want the present tense; you want one of the following 2 tenses:
...to confront the growing pension liabilities, which are leading local politicians to...
...to confront the growing pension liabilities, which have led local politicians to...
the first of these creates a parallel structure with "are beginning". you would want this parallel structure if you were implying that local politicians are just starting to do this.
the second of these implies that local politicians have already taken substantive action.

Ron

Could you please explain why "which and when" in the following examples are not referring to nearest noun before comma i.e. "19th century"?

"King of 19th century, which is known for its crime rate....."

"King of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."

"Year 1821 of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:10 am
CaptainM wrote:Ron

Could you please explain why "which and when" in the following examples are not referring to nearest noun before comma i.e. "19th century"?

"King of 19th century, which is known for its crime rate....."

"King of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."

"Year 1821 of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."
well, i'm not sure who wrote these, but they're bad examples -- the first two don't make any sense at all (i suspect that "king" isn't actually supposed to be there, and that these were copied incorrectly from somewhere else), and the third is redundant (if you say "the year 1821", then "of the 19th century" shouldn't be there).
since each of these examples is either nonsensical or redundant, then, it's not a good idea to discuss them for the sake of coming to any conclusions about modifiers, because modifiers are meaning-based (not just grammar-based).

still, though, the answer to the question that you're trying to ask is probably found in this link:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/correct-use- ... tml#197164
try that and see if your question is answered there.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:54 am
Followed by:1 members

by CaptainM » Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:29 am
lunarpower wrote:
CaptainM wrote:Ron

Could you please explain why "which and when" in the following examples are not referring to nearest noun before comma i.e. "19th century"?

"King of 19th century, which is known for its crime rate....."

"King of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."

"Year 1821 of 19th century, when lot of crime were committed, was a landmark year."
well, i'm not sure who wrote these, but they're bad examples -- the first two don't make any sense at all (i suspect that "king" isn't actually supposed to be there, and that these were copied incorrectly from somewhere else), and the third is redundant (if you say "the year 1821", then "of the 19th century" shouldn't be there).
since each of these examples is either nonsensical or redundant, then, it's not a good idea to discuss them for the sake of coming to any conclusions about modifiers, because modifiers are meaning-based (not just grammar-based).

still, though, the answer to the question that you're trying to ask is probably found in this link:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/correct-use- ... tml#197164
try that and see if your question is answered there.
RON


Thank YOU!!!!!!!!! :) :)