should altering be used considering it a casue and effect sentence?
A)acid water flowing out from abandoned mines, and the deposition of tailings, elements or compounds uncovered during mining, altering
B)which is the outflow of acidic water from abandoned mines, as well as the deposition of tailings, elements or compounds uncovered during mining, altering
C)the outflow of acidic water from abandoned mines, the deposition of tailings, elements or compounds uncovered during mining, which may alter
D)acid water flowing out from abandoned mines, the deposition of tailings, elements or compounds uncovered during mining, which may alter
E)which is the outflow of acidic water from abandoned mines , and the deposition of tailings, elements or compounds uncovered during mining, which may alter.
My Doubt:Option D:the deposition of tailings- is it an independent clause?explanation in crack verbal guide says it is a run on sentence.
isnt it a cause and effect statement ?so wont the usage of altering be correct?
which may alter-does which refer to tailings, elements or compunds?
Please help me with these three doubts.
Hi Vihar,
Please visit the below link for a detailed explanation of this question.
https://crackverbal.com/forum/threads/questions/modifiersq9crackverbal/
Feel free to revert in case of further queries
Hi ,
Thank you.
I went through the explanation. So we should’nt use ing modifier in the succeeding clause when we have two nouns( here acid rock drainage and tailings) leading to something?
Hi,
Please clarify my above doubt.
Hi Vihar,
There is no such rule. The ing modifier is used in the following 2 cases:
- There is a cause and effect relationship between the 2 clauses in the sentence – It rained heavily, leading to traffic blocks
- There is a main clause followed by a subordinate clause in the sentence – I walked my dog, listening to music