NewJersey Deer Population

[imperial.franco]

your understanding of this modifier is on point. (yes, it works in exactly the same way as "the boy says".)

on the other hand, i can't tell exactly what you are asking for.

* if your question is "Is my understanding on point?", then the answer is "Yes."

* if you're asking "what is the grammatical term/name for this construction?", then there are two answers:
1/ i don't know; (i know almost no grammar terms at all)
2/ there is no reason on earth why you should care.
if you know how the construction works, then you know everything you might ever possibly have to know about the construction.

Haha true. Thanks so much, Ron, as always.

[RonPurewal]

ok.

(i still don't know which of those two was actually your question... but, either way, the issue seems to have been put to rest.)

[neetub951]

@ron : I completely disagree with you for this question.

Meaning of the statement :
Deer population has exceeded because of two reason:

1. There is no natural predator (say tiger, lion etc. who feed on deer)
2. Green area so ample food for them

Now C says -- With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the Deer Population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

with natural predator is modifying deer population. Now deer population itself can not have natural predator (imagine deer eating another deer). it seems illogical to me.

You always emphasize meaning over anything else. Let me know if I am wrong.

[RonPurewal]

'with xxxx' does not always mean 'including xxxx'.

e.g.,
Ray has friends in every U.S. state.
--> With friends in every U.S. state, Ray has no problem finding places to sleep on road trips.

[RonPurewal]

also, C is the correct answer.

DO NOT question the correct answers!

here's a handy FAQ:

Q: Is the correct answer correct?
A: Yes.

Q: Is the correct answer wrong?
A: No.

Q: I disagree with the correct answer. Who's wrong, me or GMAC?
A: You.

Q: I wrote this other version. Is it better than the correct answer?
A: No.

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

I got 2 questions.

1. It seems that With Noun opening modifier modifies the main subject. What about with noun modifier behind a sentence like (sentence) with noun. What does the modifier modify?

2. Is With Noun modifier different from comma with noun -ing modifier? I think they are different because you said that with + [noun] + __ing describes some sort of sub-component or aspect of the observation in the main sentence, while in this thread With Noun is used to modify the subject.

[RonPurewal]

I got 2 questions.

1. It seems that With Noun opening modifier modifies the main subject. What about with noun modifier behind a sentence like (sentence) with noun. What does the modifier modify?

2. Is With Noun modifier different from comma with noun -ing modifier? I think they are different because you said that with + [noun] + __ing describes some sort of sub-component or aspect of the observation in the main sentence, while in this thread With Noun is used to modify the subject.

1/
if you are no longer discussing the problem in the thread, then this post doesn't belong in the thread. it probably belongs in the general verbal folder.

2/
if you re-post this question, please provide specific examples of the constructions you're asking about. (as written, these questions are just too abstract for me—i can't tell what you are asking.)

thanks.

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

I got 2 questions.

1. It seems that With Noun opening modifier modifies the main subject. What about with noun modifier behind a sentence like (sentence) with noun. What does the modifier modify?

2. Is With Noun modifier different from comma with noun -ing modifier? I think they are different because you said that with + [noun] + __ing describes some sort of sub-component or aspect of the observation in the main sentence, while in this thread With Noun is used to modify the subject.

1/
if you are no longer discussing the problem in the thread, then this post doesn't belong in the thread. it probably belongs in the general verbal folder.

2/
if you re-post this question, please provide specific examples of the constructions you're asking about. (as written, these questions are just too abstract for me—i can't tell what you are asking.)

thanks.

This is "with N" construction
With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the Deer Population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

And this is "with N -ing" construction
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

The first one modifies the main subject, but the second one modifies the monkey, which is the object of the sentence. Are these "constructions" used in the same way in term of meaning?

[RonPurewal]

neither of those modifiers describes only a noun. instead, both of them describe the entire action/idea of the sentence.
of course, that action/idea WILL involve the subject. (no action exists independently of its subject!) but the point is that you're describing the whole thing.

e.g., in the 'monkeys' sentence, with arms and legs xxxxx is not an inherent quality of the monkeys themselves. rather, it's a description of how the monkeys slept in the branches.
likewise for the other sentence.

in this sense, these modifiers work in the same way as do '__ing' modifiers with commas. those modifiers, too, must describe not just the noun but the entire action.
see here:
nine-months-after-the-county-gprep-sc-t4953-15.html#p75891

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

neither of those modifiers describes only a noun. instead, both of them describe the entire action/idea of the sentence.
of course, that action/idea WILL involve the subject. (no action exists independently of its subject!) but the point is that you're describing the whole thing.

e.g., in the 'monkeys' sentence, with arms and legs xxxxx is not an inherent quality of the monkeys themselves. rather, it's a description of how the monkeys slept in the branches.
likewise for the other sentence.

in this sense, these modifiers work in the same way as do '__ing' modifiers with commas. those modifiers, too, must describe not just the noun but the entire action.
see here:
nine-months-after-the-county-gprep-sc-t4953-15.html#p75891

Thank you.

[tim]

[RonPurewal]

Thank you.

no problem.

[KathyL227]

If the first half of option A were correct, is there anything wrong with the second half of the underlined text?

"....estimate the New Jersey deer population to have" grown to exceed....

yeah, that's still unidiomatic.

you wouldn't write "estimate X to have VERBed"; it should be "estimate that X has VERBed".

Hi Ron,
From my mind, there is a fatal error in A, besides the one you just mentioned: "with... without..." should describe deer or the population of the deer, not "wildlife officials".
Correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you in advance.
Kathy

[RonPurewal]

right.

[KathyL227]

right.

Thanks.