Pronoun usage - two questions

[MichaelZ337]

Hi Ron

I've got two questions for pronoun usage:

1) can a pronoun refer to a noun in prepositional phrase? Some book say Yes, while some books say No.

Below is a correct GMAT sentence:

Although the term "psychopath" is popularly applied to an especially brutal criminal, in psychology it refers to someone who is.........

Here, why the "it" cannot refer to "criminal" and thus creates a pronoun ambiguity?

2) i have heard another rule: if a pronoun serves as Subject (or Object) of a sentence, then the pronoun should refer to the noun that also serves as Subject (or Object) in another sentence (usually a dependent clause).

If we use this rule, we can resolve the problem I asked above, but this rule seems not applicable in other cases. So i am confusing about this rule.

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron

I've got two questions for pronoun usage:

1) can a pronoun refer to a noun in prepositional phrase? Some book say Yes, while some books say No.

pronouns are not subject to such elaborate rules. keep it simple!

if the following 2 things are true ...
1/ in context, it's obvious what the pronoun SHOULD stand for
2/ the pronoun is actually allowed to stand for that thing (e.g., "it" = singular noun that's not a person)
... then the pronoun is fine.
end of story.

[RonPurewal]

by the way, you can answer these questions yourself by leafing through your OG.
i just opened the OG (13th edition) to a random page in the sentence correction chapter and encountered problem #25, in which we have "about the brain" (= prep phrase), and then "it(s)" standing for the brain. so, there you go.

always do your homework first! (:

[RonPurewal]

Here, why the "it" cannot refer to "criminal" and thus creates a pronoun ambiguity?

1/
a criminal is a person. "it" can't be a person.

2/
Pronoun ambiguity is not tested on this exam.

3/
Pronoun ambiguity is not tested on this exam.

this latter point is worth mentioning twice. don't burden yourself with things that, for the purposes of this exam, aren't actually things.

[RonPurewal]

2) i have heard another rule: if a pronoun serves as Subject (or Object) of a sentence, then the pronoun should refer to the noun that also serves as Subject (or Object) in another sentence (usually a dependent clause).

this is over my head; i don't really understand what this says. but, still, i can tell you that, no, this is not a thing.

see above-- keep it simple!
as long as the pronoun (1) stands for something that's obvious in context and (2) is actually allowed (per grammar rules) to stand for that thing... it's fine. end of story.

[MichaelZ337]

Thank you Ron for your kind reply. Very helpful to me!

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.