<p>Hello all,
I just have a quick question about one writing question.</p>
<p>"A college that allows students to graduate ((a) when not having) obtained an education has not fulfilled its obligation to those students."</p>
<p>I'm confused as to why this would be considered ambiguous (it's what my tutor told me). It's closer to "students" than "college" so shouldn't it logically modify "students"?</p>
<p>or actually I meant that I thought “when not having” modified “graduate” (as in the time the students graduated, not the word student itself).</p>
<p>thanks in advance to those who reply!</p>
<p>Change tutors. It’s not in the least bit ambiguous. If your tutor didn’t know, he/she should have said that. A tutor who just makes stuff up is dangerous.</p>
<p>I can see it being ambiguous. Did the college not obtain an education or the students? Obviously it’s the students, but the sentence structure doesn’t indicate so. </p>
<p>Change college to teacher
“A teacher that allows students to graduate ((a) when not having) obtained an education has not fulfilled its obligation to those students.”
That shows you how ambiguous it can be. Does the “when not having” refer to the teacher or student? I think the fact that the original sentence has a clear person that you know you’re referring to makes you assume that it is not structurally ambiguous. However, in the sentence I mentioned, it’s not clear whether the teacher didn’t have an education and is not fulfilling his obligations to the students by being a competent teacher, or if the students have not obtained an education, but the teacher still allowed them to graduate. </p>
<p>It’s ambiguous & sloppy writing. Keep the tutor.</p>
<p>Ambiguity is as much a matter of context as it is sentence structure. The context of the original sentence mitigates the potential ambiguity. Changing “college” to “teacher” changes the context.</p>
<p>If the sentence weren’t so obviously unidiomatic, I could see a tutor saying, “Well, maybe the test people think it’s ambiguous.” But a good tutor would leap on the clunkiness first.</p>