（请教分词修饰）og 98

98.   As rainfall began to decrease in the Southwest about the middle of the twelfth century, most of the Monument Valley Anasazi abandoned their homes to join other clans whose access to water was less limited.

(A) whose access to water was less limited

(B) where there was access to water that was less limited

(C) where they had less limited water access

(D) with less limitations on water access

(E) having less limitations to water access----------A

OG解释 “
                    having is ambiguous because it is unclear whether it refers to the Anasazi or other clans ”

弱问：doing紧跟名词不是就近修饰做后置定语吗？有逗号时，才为前面整句话或主句主语。那为什么这里说having的修饰ambiguous呢？ 谢谢

OG的解释是这个意思：

因为 present participle置于句尾，习惯上多是理解成 做主句 subject的状语。但是分词紧贴名词又可以理解成为 是前者的后置定语，所以这么用不太好。（有点歧义，有点不清楚）

另外，clans have less limitations to water access，这个表达很不好,不符合英语的习惯。

加不加逗号，都可以的。

比如using这个结构，置于句末作状语常常就不加，但一般只做分词状语理解。

其他总的来说，不加逗号仍在句尾的 分词结构，总是显得unclear....

那如果分词放在句子的中间。是不是就不会产生歧义。修饰紧跟的名词了呢？

或者说，分词放在句末，若没有加逗号，一般来讲是不好的。因为有GG所讲的歧义存在。可以这样认为吗？