Touch Rule for Noun Modifier

[HemantR606]

Hi Ron,

I am writing this post to know whether I am thinking in the right way.

I have read that a noun modifier should ideally touch the noun it is modifying and that there are some exceptions for the rule too.

I have observed a few exceptions of touch rule in OG.
(I am not writing the entire questions in order to avoid copyright infringement)

SC 126, OG 12
"The use of lie dectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual that, in turn, create......"
Here, ideally, 'that' should modify 'individual', but it modifies 'reactions' here because only 'reactions' goes with the verb 'create'

SC 48, OG 12
"....., Alexandar Pope began his translation of Iliad, a work that took him .... .... a greatest translation ..."
Here, because 'a greatest translation' is given at the end of the sentence, 'a work' is modifying 'translation'. If 'a greatest translation' is not provided, the modifier can modify 'Iliad' as well.

SC 111, OG 12 (This is not an exception)
"Construction of the Roman Colosseum, which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, ............"
Here, 'which' perfectly follows touch rule and hence, 'Roman Colosseum' is modified rather than 'Construction'.


Please let me know whether I have analyzed these sentences in the right way.



----------------
Thanks,
Hemant

[RonPurewal]

yes. you are correct on all essential points.

3 things you should be sure to understand:

1/
sentences like #126 are NOT "badly written".

in your explanation, you used the word "ideally", which MAY signify that you see this sentence as somehow "less than perfect" because of where that is placed.
(i'm not sure whether you see it that way, so it's worth addressing as a possibility.)

if so, then, no, that's not true: it's often IMPOSSIBLE to place "that" directly next to the noun that it modifies.

this is certainly the case in #126, in which "...reactions in an individual" can't be broken up without rendering the sentence into nonsense. (if you don't see what i mean, try re-writing the sentence with "that" directly after "reactions"; you'll quickly find that it's impossible to do so.)

(continued below)

[RonPurewal]

2/
for this exam, your only job is to KNOW THAT IT'S POSSIBLE to place "that" a little farther from the noun.

you WILL NOT be required to determine this kind of placement, since it's largely, if not entirely, a matter of style.
so, your instructions here are only the following:
• recognize
• don't eliminate

that's all.

[RonPurewal]

3/
"which" is MUCH more restricted than "that".

in GMAC's usage, "which" is allowed to modify one of exactly 2 kinds of constructions:
1/ a noun;
2/ noun + preposition + other noun.
see here for examples:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p98900

"that", on the other hand, has MUCH more latitude, and is often separated from its noun by large swaths of verbiage.
for a particularly edifying illustration, see #50 in the Diagnostic chapter of OG (note: NOT the regular sentece correction chapter).