Who are these 'grammarians', and why should anyone care what makes them bristle? They evidently have a complete lack of appreciation for the semantic content of sentences and can only see syntax. What a very poor view of language that would be.
Professional writers, editors, and teachers of language would be perfectly fine with those sentences, because they understand language as being made up of syntax AND semantics.
In the admittedly artificially constructed SAT, the second sentence would seem to be an almost classic example of unacceptable ambiguity. Perhaps in real life, you are correct that the adjectives provide sufficient context.
Comments
Who are these 'grammarians', and why should anyone care what makes them bristle? They evidently have a complete lack of appreciation for the semantic content of sentences and can only see syntax. What a very poor view of language that would be.
Professional writers, editors, and teachers of language would be perfectly fine with those sentences, because they understand language as being made up of syntax AND semantics.
In the admittedly artificially constructed SAT, the second sentence would seem to be an almost classic example of unacceptable ambiguity. Perhaps in real life, you are correct that the adjectives provide sufficient context.