Emily Dickinson

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members

Emily Dickinson

by umaa » Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:29 pm
Emily Dickinson's letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's death in 1886, outnumbering her letters to anyone else.

A. Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's death in 1886, outnumbering

B. Dickinson were written over a period that begins a few years before Susan's marriage o Emily's brother and ended shortly before Emily's death in 1886, outnumber

C. Dickinson, written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and that ends shortly before Emily's death in 1886 and outnumbered

D. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother, ending shortly before Emily's death in 1886, and outnumbering

E. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's death in 1886, outnumber

Pls post your opinions with explanations.
What we think, we become

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 7:41 am
Thanked: 5 times

IMHO

by kc_raj » Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:47 pm
IMHO A,

beginning, ending is parallel and then gerund outnumbering is correctly used.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 2:47 am
Thanked: 12 times

Re: Emily Dickinson

by shahdevine » Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:07 pm
umaa wrote:Emily Dickinson's letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886, outnumbering her letters to anyone else.

A. Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886, outnumbering

B. Dickinson were written over a period that begins a few years before Susan's marriage o Emily's brother and ended shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886, outnumber

C. Dickinson, written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and that ends shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886 and outnumbered

D. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother, ending shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886, and outnumbering

E. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan's marriage to Emily's brother and ending shortly before Emily's D€@th in 1886, outnumber

Pls post your opinions with explanations.
E for me. although A looked enticing.

the relative clause "which were written" is a little dislocated but grammatically sound, no rules are broken...if you eliminate the relative clause, you have a good simple sentence -->"Emily Dickinson's letters to Susan Huntington outnumber her letters to anyone else."

pls provide oa.

Legendary Member
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members

by umaa » Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:12 pm
Don't you think WHICH modifies DICKINSON?

Its a common rule that WHICH modified the noun preceding it. Don't you think so?

By the way the OA is E.
What we think, we become

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 2:47 am
Thanked: 12 times

by shahdevine » Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:23 pm
umaa wrote:Don't you think WHICH modifies DICKINSON?

Its a common rule that WHICH modified the noun preceding it. Don't you think so?

By the way the OA is E.
I feel you that's why A looked enticing. The rule actually is a pronoun must always refer to a clear unmistakable antecedent. In most cases for most sentences, the relative pronoun "who, that, which, whom, etc." follows the antecedent immediately for absolute concision and clarity. If it does not it does not mean its bad, it means its "dislocated" and you have to check if the antecedent is clear. In this sentence in answer E, the "which" clearly modifies the "letters." No discrepancy, because it says "which were written." Also, "which" modifies things not persons...so even although "which" immediately follows "Dickenson" it cannot modify her.

You got this!

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:14 am
Thanked: 2 times

by Spring2009 » Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:41 pm
I am not convinced with the OA.
WHICH doesn't modify Dickinson, it modifies LETTERS. So OA can't be E.

I chose A because I don't see anything wrong with it. OUTNUMBERING modifies the main clause.

Legendary Member
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members

by umaa » Wed Aug 12, 2009 6:18 pm
shahdevine,

still i'm not convinced. WHICH always refers its preceding. Not even the phrase or clause preceding it. If that is the case, how do you say WHICH refers LETTERS?
What we think, we become