Can which clause modify participle phrases?
Which clause is usually used for summarizing or explaining the clause before it.
1 His wife was stunning, which was always his pride.
2 I left the key at the office, which did not help the situation at all.
A. What I am curious about is if it can modify the phrases, such as absolute phrase and participle phrase as below (italicized part is where the which clause modifies):
3 His wife was stunning, always attracting other men, which bothered her husband a lot.
(here, his wife's always attracting other men bothered him.)
4 I left the key at the office, having been too distracted by the appointment, which was always the problem I had.
(here, being too distracted by the appointment was always the problem he had.)
B. Also, is it possible for the which clause to modify the clause, not the phrase, as below?
5 She was stunning, born between superior parents, which was her only pride.
(as clearly seen, her being stunning, not her being born between superior parents, was her only proud.)
C. And now, here is the last question. Can which clause modify the whole clause and the phrase altogether?
6 I was cooking a horribly shaped octopus, causing me to vomit, which was (or is it were?) a serious problem.
(With this, I am not sure as to which to use (was or were), for there are two actions but those two actions are happening simultaneously)
Are all three versions, A,B, and C, correct, or are there ones that are not acceptable?