0
Pructus Posted 11 years ago
Grammar

Which

Hello....

The antecedent of the underlined "which" is "the symbols"?

If the "if taken literally" is not used here, the antecedent of "which" can be "the symbols it uses for parks, restauratns, and other places are not drawn to the same scale"?

*******
To take a simple example, a map is a scale model, but the symbols it uses for parks, restauratns, and other places are not drawn to the same scale, which if taken literally would make them much bigger or smaller in reality.
  

Top answer

The antecedent is "the symbols ... are not drawn to the same scale". The presence or absence of the phrase "if taken literally" makes no difference to this (though the phrase contributes to overall meaning, obviously).

— GPY

  • The antecedent is "the symbols ...
  • are not drawn to the same scale".
  • The presence or absence of the phrase "if taken literally" makes no difference to this (though the phrase contributes to overall meaning, obviously).
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

11 Answers
0
The antecedent is "the symbols ... are not drawn to the same scale". The presence or absence of the phrase "if taken literally" makes no difference to this (though the phrase contributes to overall meaning, obviously).
0
0
Oh, I see, I see....

Thanks so much, GPY!!
0
0
Hello...

What is the antecedent of the "which" in the passage below?
GPY already answered to this question, but I didn't give the whole passage.
So, maybe with the whole passage, his answer might be different, and also I am curious what other natives would think.
Many people argue that the antecedent is "the symbols", because the subject of "if taken literally" is "the symbols
0
0
Where is the thread to which GPY responded? These two threads should be joined.
0
0


Here's the thread, Mister MIcawber....
0
0
Paring it down as GPY did:

[A] map is a scale model, but the symbols it uses for parks... are not drawn to the same scale, which would make them much bigger or smaller in reality.

It seems to me that the same scale would make the parks unnaturally large.
0
0
pructusMany people argue that the antecedent is "the symbols",
If "which" referred to "the symbols" then the meaning would be that the symbols would make the symbols bigger or smaller. This doesn't make any sense. It is the fact that they are not drawn to scale which would make them bigger or smaller. Also, it is a real strain grammatically to make "which
0
0
I see... I see....
Thanks a lot, GPY!!
Now it is a lot more clear.....
0
0
Reading your explanations, I feel that the if the antecedent of the "which" is "the symbols" then, the "which" should have been words like, so, therefore, thus, etc. Because there is no reason to use "which" in that place, as you explained...
0
0
GPYIf "which" referred to "the symbols" then the meaning would be that the symbols would make the symbols bigger or smaller. This doesn't make any sense.
I'm sorry, this isn't right. "them" refers to the parks, restaurants, and other places. However, the structure still, in my view, dictates that "which" cannot refer to "symbols".
pructus
0

Related Questions