When drafting the Declaration of Sentiments that

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron,
That also problematic in B and D?
B. Including a call for female enfranchisement, a draft of the Declaration of Sentiments was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Conventions in 1848 that Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote
--> that refereing to 1848,-->incorrect, right ?

D. A call for female enfranchisement, included in Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s draft of the Declaration of Sentiments in 1848, that was adopted by the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention.
--> the modifier between that and antecedent is way too large. Is this allowed?

thanks in anticipation

[RonPurewal]

it's not right to say "that = 1848" there -- that's a needlessly narrow interpretation of "that".
look at OG DIAGNOSTIC problem #50 (NOT #50 in the SC chapter) -- there's actually quite a bit of stuff between "that" and the core noun that it modifies. but, if you think about it, those things have to intervene between "that" and the noun; it's impossible to write the sentence with "that" any closer to the noun (try to imagine doing so, and you'll see pretty quickly that you can't).

here, you're making this needlessly difficult. NEVER make decisions about MODIFIER PLACEMENT in INDIVIDUAL ANSWER CHOICES!
this is a multiple-choice test! take advantage of the multiple choices!
• figure out what the modifier SHOULD modify
• COMPARE the choices
• find the choice(s) in which the modifier is CLOSEST to that thing
• eliminate the others.

[Crisc419]

hey, Ron, sorry .
can you explain more about B. when i read the sentence, i don't know what "Elizabeth Candy' wrote, "conventions" or "the draft". so i can't eliminate B from this reason.
thanks a million.

[RonPurewal]

hey, Ron, sorry .
can you explain more about B. when i read the sentence, i don't know what "Elizabeth Candy' wrote, "conventions" or "the draft". so i can't eliminate B from this reason.
thanks a million.

"convention" (as used here) means "a large meeting or conference". this is clearly not something that a person can write.

[Crisc419]

hey, Ron, sorry .
can you explain more about B. when i read the sentence, i don't know what "Elizabeth Candy' wrote, "conventions" or "the draft". so i can't eliminate B from this reason.
thanks a million.

"convention" (as used here) means "a large meeting or conference". this is clearly not something that a person can write.

Thanks very much, Ron.

[YUQINGL417]

I'm unclear about what's wrong with using past perfect tense in answer choice C. It seems to be that the inclusion DID happen before the Declaration was adopted.

that choice uses a "when" modifier, implying that the action described in the main clause was simultaneous with the action described in the modifier.
since that's the case, the tense switch is illogical.

see:
when i arrived at home, smoke was billowing from the oven.
Hi, Ron
I'm having trouble with the tense in B.
I think there should be cases where incidences of different time can be connected with "when", for instance:
[i]I had had dinner when you got home last night.
So i don't think it is necessary for 2 things to happen at the same time with "when".
Additionally, I think the problem with B is that it changes the meaning that the author wants to show, since what the author wants to show is that a call for female enfranchisement is included in the declaration, but B is focused on the time that the call was included before the adoption.
hoping for your reply

[RonPurewal]

in your sentence
I had eaten dinner when you got home last night:

• "I ate dinner" is something that was only true while you were actually eating dinner.
• "I had eaten dinner" was true forever after that point. (in the same way, "i have graduated from high school" is true, NOW, for EVERYONE who has ever graduated from high school—even if they graduated 50 years ago.)

...so, yes, "when" is used for two things that are simultaneous.

__

if you wrote I ate dinner when you got home last night, THEN that means that you actually ate at the same time when the other person arrived.

[RonPurewal]

Additionally, I think the problem with B is that it changes the meaning that the author wants to show, since what the author wants to show is that a call for female enfranchisement is included in the declaration, but B is focused on the time that the call was included before the adoption.
hoping for your reply

if you're trying to ask a question in this part ^^, i can't tell what you're trying to ask.

[Crisc419]

in your sentence
I had eaten dinner when you got home last night:

• "I ate dinner" is something that was only true while you were actually eating dinner.
• "I had eaten dinner" was true forever after that point. (in the same way, "i have graduated from high school" is true, NOW, for EVERYONE who has ever graduated from high school—even if they graduated 50 years ago.)

...so, yes, "when" is used for two things that are simultaneous.

__

if you wrote I ate dinner when you got home last night, THEN that means that you actually ate at the same time when the other person arrived.

so what's wrong with choice C?

(C) When the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women's Convention in 1848, a call for female enfranchisement had been included in it.

"had been included in it" was true forever, including the point "when the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women's Convention in 1848".

thanks.

Cris

[RonPurewal]

if you write "when X, Y"...
Y has to be IN THE SAME TIMEFRAME as X.

that's the whole point of the "when" construction.

the "had ___ed" tense implies a DIFFERENT (earlier) timeframe, so, it's nonsense in that context.