0
Anonymous Posted 10 years ago
Grammar
Non-restrictive clauses--modifying a verb?
She shopped for shoes, which was expensive.
Could this be construed as grammatically correct? The non-restrictive clause would seem to refer to shoes, but since it is a singular "was," I would think the writer is referring to the act of shopping being expensive.
Can a non-restrictive clause jump over a noun to modify a previous verb? Is the act of shopping what is expensive in this sentence, or should it just be reworded? (Shopping for shoes was expensive.)
Any help or ideas would be appreciated.
Could this be construed as grammatically correct? The non-restrictive clause would seem to refer to shoes, but since it is a singular "was," I would think the writer is referring to the act of shopping being expensive.
Can a non-restrictive clause jump over a noun to modify a previous verb? Is the act of shopping what is expensive in this sentence, or should it just be reworded? (Shopping for shoes was expensive.)
Any help or ideas would be appreciated.
Top answer
Anonymous I would think the writer is referring to the act of shopping being expensive. Right. Anonymous Can a non-restrictive clause jump over a noun to modify a previous verb?
- Anonymous I would think the writer is referring to the act of shopping being expensive.
- Right.
- Anonymous Can a non-restrictive clause jump over a noun to modify a previous verb?
- When I was in school, the answer was an emphatic 'no', but later I found that this sort of structure is accepted by many grammarians.
- Anonymous should it just be reworded?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
AnonymousI would think the writer is referring to the act of shopping being expensive.Right.
AnonymousCan a non-restrictive clause jump over a noun to modify a previous verb?When I was in school, the answer was an emphatic 'no', but later I found that this sort of structure is accepted by many grammarians.
00
AnonymousCould this be construed as grammatically correct?Yes, but it is stylistically distasteful.
0
Related Questions