Kneel for two sentences of English understanding, 200 points.

The first sentence contains an attributive clause with the subject John Geoghan. In this sentence, the "prepositional object" after the preposition by in "being sentenced to life imprisonment by a cellmate for murder" is the source of your misunderstanding. The subject means that in this sentence, it is the main one, and the subject is the natural modification of the clause. If you want to modify cellmate, you can only start another sentence with cellmate as the subject. However, these are just theoretical empty talk. Here is an example: for example, a sentence is about litchi, and the subject is litchi. Can't you write "Litchi is a kind of fruit deeply loved by Princess Yang Yuhuan, she is so beautiful!" This is a quality problem, people can't write that sentence! So please believe the people who write sentences, they will not intentionally use attributive clauses to modify the elements that should not be modified.

The second sentence contains adverbial clauses of reasons and a little "ambiguous pronoun reference". The subject of the first article is individual entrepreneurs. As for the specific reference object of the subject of the second clause, we don't know. At this time, in addition to understanding the context (see how to pave the way below), we must rely on realistic analysis (this sentence is about entrepreneurs looking for backers, but fortunately, the second sentence has a negative backers, which should still be about small bosses, because the reality is not cruel enough to do things only by relationships), if not, we can only let the author change words (the reference object of pronouns that are easy to cause misunderstanding should be clear; The naming of people's names should be carried out, not punning. Your narrative is very expressive, and here is just an attempt to translate this sentence: private enterprise owners don't need to rely on relatives, because relatives have money doesn't mean they will give it to you.

Here, I want to declare again, in order to greatly degrade the status of the object! Usually in a sentence, there are only predicates at the same level as the subject, so we can think that a sentence is only composed of subject and predicate!

The object is equivalent to the recipient in the past grammar, so it is just a word, a component contained in the predicate! Back to contemporary grammar, it can be recorded as follows: predicate = transitive verb (or intransitive verb+preposition)+object (I love you); Predicate = copula+predicate (I am human).