As an ESL student, I found some embedded clause sentences really hard to understand. I'll give examples below.
It is what the position that the author tries to undermine is purported to explain.
It is cited as a commonly accepted reason for accepting a hypothesis for which the argument offers independent evidence.
It is a claim whose acceptance by critics who differ on other issues is cited by the argument as evidence of its truth.
I found out that it helped if I jump around and regroup the sentence instead of reading through from the beginning to the end. Is it a valid way to effectively interpret difficult sentences? If you use this approach, do you just intuitively reconnect different parts of the sentence? Is there a grammatical rule on how to restructure the embedded clause?
