Goel Mohit,
Relative pronouns some time refer to a previously mentioned phrase, the mgmat does mentions that as well...

Oh ok....may be in new edition this might be the case....

Can you please tell....how to find out whether a relative pronoun is refering to a noun/noun phrase....

I too have same doubt...
Manhattan says which, who and whom, if present immediately after comma, refer to the noun immediately preceding comma, but if comma is not present, this rule doesn't apply. But i am not sure of 'whose'...

rahulg83 wrote:I too have same doubt...
Manhattan says which, who and whom, if present immediately after comma, refer to the noun immediately preceding comma, but if comma is not present, this rule doesn't apply. But i am not sure of 'whose'...

Thanks Rahul.

Can you please tell

a) X of Y, who
b) X of Y who

In the above sentences what does who modifies and why....assuming both X and Y are nouns....which can be properly modified by who individually....

Goel,
See the example on page 54 in old manhattan:

Police work is very important as it is the backbone of law enforcement.

Here it is referring to Police work is very important.

Coming back to your example:

X and Y, who
X and Y who

Here in both cases who is referring to Y, albeit differently, in first case who is an non-restrictive optional description of Y, in second case whatever following Y will be an important explanation about Y.

Dont go by Manhattan, manhattan is a sub-standarad explanation, instead pick wren and martin and you will be placed much better...

maihuna wrote:Goel,
See the example on page 54 in old manhattan:

Police work is very important as it is the backbone of law enforcement.

Here it is referring to Police work is very important.

Here in the above example, in my opinion there is no relative pronoun. Probably I am not able to understand what you meant to say in the above post. Can you please tell in a bit more detail ?

maihuna wrote: Coming back to your example:

X and Y, who
X and Y who

Here in both cases who is referring to Y, albeit differently, in first case who is an non-restrictive optional description of Y, in second case whatever following Y will be an important explanation about Y.

Yes, I agree about the restrictive and non-restrictive part.

But, please note that my doubt is in the following constructions:

a) X of Y, who
b) X of Y who

Please note that as Rahul mentioned in one of the above posts that:

"Manhattan says which, who and whom, if present immediately after comma, refer to the noun immediately preceding comma, but if comma is not present, this rule doesn't apply"

So I am a bit more curious to understand this rule in more detail. This rule has really confused me a lot.

Aha, the pronouns are pronoun be it "it" or be it "some relative pronoun. Why you look for relative pronoun to mean preceding noun is that in place of several types of pronoun(number, case, person) most of the relative pronoun may refer to class of nouns...i mean several nouns....take for eample, who it can refer to several type of singular plurals as long as it is human....

the eample i putted from mgmat, it refers to "police work" which is an phrase...if "it" can refer to it, similarly some suitable pronoun may relate to it...and so a relative pronoun may refer to an precedent phrase...

what I am trying to point out in several of my posts is that MGMAT is a way to produce some commonly tested OG concepts in easy way, they are not comprehensive, while most of your mails these days looks for MGMAT saying this so that will happen...

You need to broaden your grammar review, please pick up wren and martin and go through their comprehensive coverage of "pronoun" and S+V chapters...do not cry for manhattans key they will not help beyond obvious, you need to dive, truly, I do not want to see you crying for mgmat explanation, please take it positively, I am no different, but not crying, and hope you too can do the same...

Thanks Maihuna.

Will look into the grammar book if things does not clear here.

But overall IMO Manhattan do a pretty fantastic job of covering the topics tested in GMAT. No I am not a marketing executive of Manhattan

Basically surely follows atleast the 80:20 rule for sure in a very lucid way.

so what is OA?

D or B?

OA is B though I am not convinced, I myself choosed D and was surprised to see answer as B, there is no OE though.

Unlike the low status accorded the craftwork of many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, Native American women of the Plains tribes often received public recognition, wealth, and prestige for their craftwork.

cata1yst wrote:Also "...in the American West" is a preposition so the clause should modify the noun before which is women.

In this sentence there is a comparison, hence the word "Unlike"...since there is a comparison you need to make sure they are comparing similar objects and the object after the comma matches. In B it says "Unlike many women settlers..., Native American women..."

This compares the two objects correctly. "...in the American West is not the object."

Does this make sense?

Thanks cata1yst.

Probably I was not clear in my last post. But actually my doubt was as below:

==============================================
Although "B" looks best....can someone please help me understand is placement of "whose" is correct in B...

as per my understanding....whose should modify the nearest noun....but here the nearest noun is American west....shouldn't it be next to Women....
===============================================

goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks cata1yst.

Probably I was not clear in my last post. But actually my doubt was as below:

==============================================
Although "B" looks best....can someone please help me understand is placement of "whose" is correct in B...

as per my understanding....whose should modify the nearest noun....but here the nearest noun is American west....shouldn't it be next to Women....
===============================================

Unlike the low status accorded the craftwork of many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, Native American women of the Plains tribes often received public recognition, wealth, and prestige for their craftwork.

(B) Unlike many women settlers in the nineteenth-century American West, whose craftwork was accorded low status, Native American women of the Plains tribes


No...American West is not the nearest noun in B. The nearest noun is women. "whose" is modifying "women settlers in...". So B is correct. "American West" is describing the women. It is not the object whose is refering to.

Thanks Cata1yst. Yes, logical what you are saying is perfect.

But grammatically how to find out whether the whose is modifying the nearest noun....or some other preceding noun...

Manhattan says that modifier should touch the noun they are modifying....here since American West is the nearest noun....then for what reason it is modifying women ?

goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks Cata1yst. Yes, logical what you are saying is perfect.

But grammatically how to find out whether the whose is modifying the nearest noun....or some other preceding noun...

Manhattan says that modifier should touch the noun they are modifying....here since American West is the nearest noun....then for what reason it is modifying women ?

That's your problem..."American West" is NOT a noun in this clause...