Noun Pronoun

Question 1

What kind of relationship exists between Noun and pronoun entity

Answer 1

Noun Pronoun pairs have a unidirectional relationship i.e. a pronoun must refer to a noun no matter what but a noun can exists without a pronoun

Note: This relation differs from SV pair where a single subject can refers to multiple verbs or single verb can refer to multiple subjects

MeM also has a unidirectional relationship i.e. each modifier should refer to a modified entity but a modified entity can exist without a modifier

Question 2

Is the below sentence correct?

In 2008, Indonesia’s tea industry was severely affected by a parasitic infestation, but a decade later, it is about to harvest its biggest crop

Answer 2

Here the “it” in the second clause refers to the “tea industry” and is unambiguous. because “it” is the subject of second clause and it can refer clearly to the subject of the first clause

Question 3

What is wrong with the below sentence?

Alice fell from the stairs while rushing to the playground which caused injury to her leg

Answer 3

The which in this sentence is trying to refer to the action “falling from stairs” because that is what caused injury to the leg, but that’s invalid we cannot use pronouns to refer to verbs. hence below sentence would be correct

Alice fell from the stairs while rushing to the playground, a fall which caused injury to her leg

Question 4

Logic Agreement of noun pronoun entity

XYZ Agritech has decided to buy a piece of land from its rival Zolona Corp, which is very fertile and suitable for growing cherry trees.

Answer 4

Here which refers to “Zolona Corp” and that is not logical because Zolona Corp is not something that can be fertile.

To make the sentence logical we will need to either update the noun or the pronoun

Question 5

What is wrong with the below sentence?

The recent mass shooting incidence in Texas is clearly a case where the authorities have failed to respond in time

Answer 5

Here the usage of “where” is illogical as where should be used only of places and given case is not a place the usage is not valid.

The sentence would be correct if we use “in which” -> referring to “case”.

Note: One could argue that where could refer to Texas where authority failed to respond on time but the context of “have” should be enough to point that it is the case that we are referring to

Question 6

Observe the below sentence and tell whether it is correct/incorrect

1. Jack picked a blue sweater from the rack as he imagined it would look good with a dark trouser
2. During the storm, the lightning struck the cowshed, but its roof was not damaged
3. Jack was carrying a camera and a smartphone in his bag when he saw the accident and decide to take it out to capture a picture

Answer 6

1. Here we have two possible antecedents of “it” -> “sweater” and “rack”. but logically rack wouldn’t make sense so we don’t have any ambiguity in the sentence and it is clear
2. it can refer to multiple items “storm”, “lightning” and “cowshed” but again only cowshed will make sense hence the sentence is clear and not ambiguous
3. Here “it” could logically refer to both smartphone or camera so we have ambiguity and will need to clear that up so this is not correct. However, if we add or modify the sentence such as Jack was carrying a camera and a smartphone in his bag when he saw the accident and decide to take it out to call 911 then “it” is not ambiguous as we can only use a smartphone to make a call