Target Test Prep 20% Off Flash Sale is on! Code: FLASH20

Redeem
Target Test Prep Flash Sale
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

MORE DETAILS
Magoosh
Magoosh
Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

MORE DETAILS
Magoosh

MGMAT_I find all options wrong! Experts HELP

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:43 am
thanks gmat guru
but i am finding this little hard to reconcile .
i agree with this following quote of yours :
The conveyed meaning -- that crime was leading to a rise in property values -- is strange.
now what is preventing me to see the " FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES" example in that light ?
i mean i can say that FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES cannot bring to 34 the number of wild birds successfully raised since transplants from Norway began in 1975
it is in fact because the FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES left their nests in western Scotland this summer that led to decrease in their number .

kindly help me understand
thanks and regards
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:11 am
aditya8062 wrote:thanks gmat guru
but i am finding this little hard to reconcile .
i agree with this following quote of yours :
The conveyed meaning -- that crime was leading to a rise in property values -- is strange.
now what is preventing me to see the " FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES" example in that light ?
i mean i can say that FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES cannot bring to 34 the number of wild birds successfully raised since transplants from Norway began in 1975

kindly help me understand
thanks and regards
To bring to 34 means to increase the number to 34.
Before the five sea eagles left their nests, there were 29 successfully raised wild birds.
When the five sea eagles left their nests, they INCREASED THE NUMBER of successfully raised wild birds TO 34.
In other words:
Five fledgling sea eagles left their nests, INCREASING TO 34 the number of successfully raised wild birds.
it is in fact because the FIVE FLEDGLING SEA EAGLES left their nests in western Scotland this summer that led to decrease in their number .
Agreed: the VERBing action (bringing) is part of the preceding action (left).
Since the eagles are the subject of the preceding action, they serve also as the AGENT of the VERBing action.
In other words, BOTH actions can be attributed to the eagles: the BRINGING happened when the eagles LEFT.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:42 am
thanks again Gmat guru
plz also tell me as how do i reconcile the above rule with following sentence :the high-powered cameras on the new satellite took detailed pictures of the martian surface, expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes taking place on the "red planet".

in this sentence will it be logical to say the high powered cameras are expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes taking place on the "red planet"?

thanks and regards
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:06 am
aditya8062 wrote:thanks again Gmat guru
plz also tell me as how do i reconcile the above rule with following sentence :the high-powered cameras on the new satellite took detailed pictures of the martian surface, expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes taking place on the "red planet".

in this sentence will it be logical to say the high powered cameras are expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes taking place on the "red planet"?

thanks and regards
Don't force the preceding subject to be also the SUBJECT of the COMMA + VERBing modifier.
While a VERBing modifier has an AGENT -- something responsible for the VERBing action -- it doesn't really have a subject.

Rather, ask the following question:
Does it make sense to ATTRIBUTE the COMMA + VERBing modifier to the preceding subject?

The high-powered cameras on the new satellite took detailed pictures, expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes.
Here, it makes sense to attribute the VERBing modifier (expanding) to the preceding subject (the cameras).
The cameras took detailed pictures.
As a result of this action, there was an expanding of knowledge.
Hence, it make sense to ATTRIBUTE the expanding to the cameras:
The EXPANDING happened because the cameras TOOK detailed pictures.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:49 am
thanks gmat guru
thinking on these lines can i make following interpretation about this sentence :Jim became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly

jim became the CFO of the company and this action led to the increment of his salary .
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Apr 11, 2014 5:50 am
aditya8062 wrote:thanks gmat guru
thinking on these lines can i make following interpretation about this sentence :Jim became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly

jim became the CFO of the company and this action led to the increment of his salary .
Jim became CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly.
Here, a reader might construe that Jim's first decision as CFO was to increase his own pay.
Since this meaning is not what you intend, the sentence should be rephrased.
The following would work better:
Jim became CFO of the company, impressing all his friends.
Here, the act of impressing all his friends is part of what happened when Jim became CFO.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:21 am
thank you gmat guru for all your patience and wonderful responses .i guess u might be wondering as why am i pestering over this issue but honestly ,i have a feeling that this new angle to the comma + verbing modifier might have come into play especially after the following sentence in OG 13 came into light
sc from OG #13 :Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"-at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

now as per OG this sentence is wrong .it is wrong for precisely the same reason that you have been explaining .even RON has explained this new angle to comma +verb ing modifier (i did ask him at the manhattan forum )
i guess the confusion was there in my mind as in one of the RON's post i have read the following :
RON said :the point of these modifiers is to modify the action of the preceding clause, as you have stated. while it is often true that the clause's subject can serve as a literal subject for the -ing action, that doesn't always have to be the case -- basically, the action must be modified, and the subject has to be in some way directly relevant to the -ing action.
here's another example:
the high-powered cameras on the new satellite took detailed pictures of the martian surface, expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes taking place on the "red planet".
in this sentence, it's definitely inappropriate to say that the cameras themselves expanded the astronomers' knowledge. however, the action of taking detailed pictures expanded their knowledge, and the cameras, in turn, performed that action -- making this sentence acceptable.
this quote of RON is a old one and now even he has made this new angle to comma +verbing modifier very explicit .
honestly i hold both you and RON very highly in the field of gmat .so thanks again
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:44 am
Focus on the LOGIC.

Our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers.
NO: Given the fact that our ancestors suffered an event, it makes no sense to attribute the REDUCING of our ancestors' numbers to the ANCESTORS themselves.
Our ancestors were not responsible for reducing their own numbers.
Rather, it was the EVENT that reduced our ancestors numbers.

The high-powered cameras took detailed pictures, expanding astronomers' knowledge of the geological processes.
YES: Here, it makes perfect sense to attribute the EXPANDING of knowledge to the CAMERAS.
The EXPANDING of knowledge happened because the CAMERAS too such detailed pictures.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:04 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by sv77 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:01 pm
Hi Mitch,

Regarding the below statements , just in the same way , we can not attribute the REDUCING of our ancestors' numbers to the ANCESTORS themselves , I was wondering how we can attribute increasing of wild sea eagles's number to 5 Sea Eagles themselves ? Is it because subject here is 5 sea eagles and not wild sea eagles ?

Our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers.
Five fledgling sea eagles left their nests, INCREASING TO 34 the number of successfully raised wild birds.


Thanks..
Top
Post new topic Post Reply