+0
1. Sometimes an employer does not listen closely to suggestions from employees, making workers feel undervalued.
For this sentence, I think "making worker...." is wrong in regards to the rest of the sentence. Why we need a participial clause here?

2. The city is populated by many people who, although their common language is English, the languages at home range from speaking Armenian to Zapotec. <If you need to change the underlined part to make the sentence grammatically correct or concise>

A) same

B) speak languages at home that range from Armenian to Zapotec.

3. The age of eighty-two having been reached, the children's author Geisel startled the world by writing another book.

A) When he reached the age of eighty-two

B) Having reached for the age of eighty-two

I chose B, but the answer was A. I think in A, it says "he", but in the second clause, it defines the person already, so usually we don't mention anything in the first clause. that's why I chose B.

Thanks for helping.
1 2
Comments  
1. The participial clause is not wrong. But you don't need it either. You could have written it differently, with words that mean the same thing, for example,
Sometimes an employer does not listen closely to suggestions from employees. This ( [practice / behavior] ) makes workers feel undervalued.

2. The city is populated by many people who ... the languages at home range from speaking Armenian to Zapotec.

I'm surprised you thought this made sense. It's a combination of The city is populated by many people and They the languages at home range from speaking Armenian to Zapotec. That second part isn't correct. It has no verb.
3. reached is very different from reached for. If there is a bottle very high on a shelf, you may have to stand on your toes and stretch to reach for it. But you can't reach for an age; you can only reach for physical objects. So B cannot be correct.
CJ
Hi,

1. You could use a relative clause, "which makes workers feel undervalued," but to my ear the participial phrase is a bit smoother. Can you explain your objection to it?

2. "Who" is about to become the subject of a relative clause. It's interrupted by a parenthetical expression. When you come back to complete the "who" clause, you need to say what "who" does. "People who speak" makes sense. "People who the languages at home" makes no sense. "The languages at home range etc." is an independent clause. It has no use for the "who" which was left dangling before the parenthetical expression, "although their common language is English."

3. There's a limit to how much the second clause can make up for information missing in the first clause. Because the first clause is in the passive, there's simply nothing to connect it to the second one. (I'm speaking here of the original version.) The age of eighty-two may have been attained by his parrot.
Of course, "same" is not an option here, as it was in number two. I would choose A because it includes the word "he", making the connection clear - a reason you reject.
So why do I reject B ? Mainly because the word "for" makes it nonsensical. "Reaching for an age" is not idiomatic. Without the "for," it would be as good as A, the phrase clearly modifying "author."

Best wishes, - A.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
CalifJim I'm surprised you thought this made sense. It's a combination of The city is populated by many people and They the languages at home range from speaking Armenian to Zapotec. That second part isn't correct. It has no verb.
Hi Jim, I would have said it has two subjects (and one verb).

P.S. Is "making workers feel undervalued" really a clause?

Best regards, - A.
AvangiI would have said it has two subjects (and one verb).
Emotion: big smile I think I read it too fast and took "home range" as a compound noun! In any case, if the car is such a wreck that it won't move, does it really matter if it has a dent on the right or the left? Emotion: smile
Avangimaking workers feel undervalued
If the presence of a verb makes a clause, I assume it's a clause, yes! The underlying structure is (It) makes workers feel undervalued, which is so "clause-y" that it's a sentence!

CJ
Thanks, Jim. Right, it only matters to the guy who has to order the new fender.

My clause problem was I didn't realize "making" qualified as a verb for that purpose.

Best regards, - A.

Edit. Isn't "Home range" where the beer and the cantaloupe lay?
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
AvangiIsn't "Home range" where the beer and the cantaloupe lay?
Let's say that that's our story, and we're sticking to it! Emotion: big smile
Avangididn't realize "making" qualified as a verb
Sometimes the terms of "traditional" grammar contradict those of transfomational grammar, so terminology does occasionally end up in shambles. I tend to use the latter.
So, for example, in
I want to explain this rule
to explain this rule is a clause, because underlying it we have "I explain this rule", where "I" is, of course, understood.
And in
I believe him to be an expert
him to be an expert is a clause, because underlying it we have "He is an expert".
And so on, including all sorts of cases where the terminology seems at odds with traditional terms.
I don't even know the "traditional" term for the structure we're discussing here (with making ...) except that it involves a present participle.

CJ
CalifJimI don't even know the "traditional" term for the structure we're discussing here (with making ...) except that it involves a present participle.
CJ:
In the "classical" grammar I learned soon after the emergence of modern English Emotion: smile, "making workers feel undervalued" would be analyzed as a participial phrase.
Most of the English grammar reference web sites I have used still keep to the "classical" grammar terminology. That is, a clause is defined as a group of words having both a subject and a (full, complete) verb. Groups of words which do not include both subject and verb are called phrases (not clauses).
If the phrase is headed by a present participle and acts grammatically in context as an adjective, it is called a participial phrase. If it acts grammatically as a noun, it is a gerund phrase.
Prepositional phrases are headed by a preposition, noun phrases by a noun, verb phrases by a verb, etc, etc,
I guess I'm just old-fashioned, but it all makes sense to me....
AlpheccaStarsIf the phrase is headed by a present participle and acts grammatically in context as an adjective, it is called a participial phrase.
Thanks for the clarification. But in the quoted sentence, "making ..." does not act as an adjective. What noun does it modify? It seems to me that it "modifies" an entire sentence -- and I don't even think "modify" is a correct description of what it does -- making it a "sentential adverbial participial phrase"?
The "making ..." structure occurs again in my own sentence! Emotion: smile
CJ
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more