clock60 wrote:hi guys,
The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual that, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses.
(A) that, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses
(B) that creates unconscious physiological responses in turn
(C) creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses
(D) to create, in turn, physiological responses that are unconscious
(E) who creates unconscious physiological responses in turn
oa is A

this problem was discussed not once with experts aslo. but i did not find the answer on my particular question.
why that (after in an individual) does not modify nearest noun-individual, but instead modifies reactions
and the second
what is wrong in E, is it wrong for example because undividual can`t create ...responces, and intended meaning is that reactions create unconsious responces

X Preposition Y THAT, whether THAT refers to X or Y depends on the context.

In this problem, THAT cannot refer to Individual for the following reasons:

1. To refer to person, we need to use WHO.
2. "That create unconscious physical responses in turn" indicates that "that" should refer to something that can create unconscious responses. It is emotional reaction that can do it.
3. The verb "create" agrees with the plural "reactions". reactions that create...

Another example:

The list of animals that exhibit preferences.

--> In this sentence that refers to ANIMALS because:
1. Animals can exhibit preferences, and list cannot.
2. The verb exhibit agrees with ANIMALS, plural NOUN, but does not agree with LIST, singular NOUN.

Why E is incorrect:

Reactions in individual who creates unconscious responses....... is NOT correct only for one reason:

--> It changes the intended meaning of the sentence.
--> It is not the individual, rather it is the "REACTIONS" that can create unconscious responses.

Thanks.

hi gmat_perfect
thank you for reply
does it happen that when we see construction
noun1+preposition+noun2+ relative pronoun (that or which) it dependes on the context of the sentence for which noun(1 or 2) pronoun refers, to me it is more testing your understanding of language as a whole rather then of grammer rules

@Clock,

gmat_perfect gave a splendid reply. Adding on to that plz see this example.

Marconi's conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.

A. Marconi's conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
B. Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is
C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become
D. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become
E. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is,

Here OA is C. Like in the previous example of urs, here also "that " modifies "tool" and NOT the preceding noun "conversation".
This is a OG question.

clock60 wrote:hi gmat_perfect
thank you for reply
does it happen that when we see construction
noun1+preposition+noun2+ relative pronoun (that or which) it depends on the context of the sentence for which noun(1 or 2) pronoun refers, to me it is more testing your understanding of language as a whole rather then of grammar rules

Yes, you are correct.

Another example:

I have a box of pens, which has been bought from new market. [Look, which refers to box because box has]

I need the box of pens, which have been bought from new market. [Look, which refers to pens because pens have]

I think you got it.

Thanks.

In more highly-inflected languages, the referent for that would be clear. Context is key.

This does mean that if you had two nouns (both singular or both plural) that created ambiguity unresolved by the verb, you would want to rewrite the sentence.

hi guys thanks to all for great replies
but when i see your solutions, examples they seems very convincing, but when i start to solve problems i have real troubles, what can you say about below sentence, to me it tests the same concept that is too elusive to me

Out of America's fascination with all things antique have grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that are bringing back the chaise lounge, the overstuffed sofa, and the claw-fotted bathtub.

A) things antique have grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that are bringing
B) things antique has grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that is briniging
C) things that are antiques has grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that bring
D) antique things have grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that are bringing
E) antique things has grown a market for bygone styles of furniture and fixtures that bring
oa is B source og

i again interested to the reference of that, but here construction seems even more convoluted
and even one more question, when we have compound subject, or object modified by that or which, does that or which refers to the closest noun or to the whole= noun1 and noun2
thanks