a SC from prep
dy of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.
a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing
b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing
I see it in another post, But I just post a new question
QUOTE RON--nope. some of them do, but some of them act as adjectival modifiers (i.e., modifying nouns). this totally depends on context; there's no formula based on parts of speech alone.
for instance:
I went to see the royal palace in Brussels. --> in this case, "in Brussels" modifies just "the royal palace", not the whole clause.
I went to see the royal palace in 1995. --> in this case, "in 1995" modifies the whole clause.---quote]
en,.
en, ron say, what comma+prepositional phrase / no comma+ prepositional phrase modify depends on context, but if I can judge the meaning and I find out the clause/ noun that it modify, how can I justify whether it is correct or not? I mean I read it and know what it modify and then I can not judge ?
dy of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.
a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing
b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing
I see it in another post, But I just post a new question
QUOTE RON--nope. some of them do, but some of them act as adjectival modifiers (i.e., modifying nouns). this totally depends on context; there's no formula based on parts of speech alone.
for instance:
I went to see the royal palace in Brussels. --> in this case, "in Brussels" modifies just "the royal palace", not the whole clause.
I went to see the royal palace in 1995. --> in this case, "in 1995" modifies the whole clause.---quote]
en,.
en, ron say, what comma+prepositional phrase / no comma+ prepositional phrase modify depends on context, but if I can judge the meaning and I find out the clause/ noun that it modify, how can I justify whether it is correct or not? I mean I read it and know what it modify and then I can not judge ?
