... and that's how you know that amy is not a particularly nice person.sachindia wrote:so, in the example mentioned above, standing is modifying the previous clause rite? and not harry..
Please correct me if I am wrong.
modifier issue expert
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:57 pm
- Thanked: 2 times
I have a follow up question.
What is the difference between the following two sentences in terms of modifier sentence modifying noun/action:
Amy made fun of harry, standing on one leg [My understanding: "standing .." modifies action "made fun"]
Amy, standing on one leg, made fun of harry [My understanding: "standing .." modifies noun "Amy"]
If my understanding is correct, what's the difference between the meaning of the two sentences?
thanks in advance
What is the difference between the following two sentences in terms of modifier sentence modifying noun/action:
Amy made fun of harry, standing on one leg [My understanding: "standing .." modifies action "made fun"]
Amy, standing on one leg, made fun of harry [My understanding: "standing .." modifies noun "Amy"]
If my understanding is correct, what's the difference between the meaning of the two sentences?
thanks in advance
IMO, answer should be B. Here is my reasoning..arghya05 wrote:Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs
that enable a family with insufficient savings for a
conventional down payment to be able to move into
new housing and to apply part of the rent to a
purchase later.
(A) programs that enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to be
able to move into new housing and to apply
(B) programs that enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to
move into new housing and to apply
(C)programs; that enables a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to
move into new housing, to apply
(D) programs, which enables a family with
insufficient savings for a conventional down
payment to move into new housing, applying
(E) programs, which enable a family with insufficient
savings for a conventional down payment to be
able to move into new housing, applying
in d and e applying modifes family instead of rent-to-buy program
is my reasoning correct
1) to be able to move should be to move
2) to move and to apply should be parallel
Thus,A fails because of reason 1.
C has incorrect punctuation, ; should be followed by Although/however etc. and should be an independent sentence otherwise.
D fails because of reason 2
E fails because of reason 2.
B matches all criteria and thus should be correct.
Could you please provide OA?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
what's interesting, here, is that you've basically answered your own question.divineacclivity wrote:I have a follow up question.
What is the difference between the following two sentences in terms of modifier sentence modifying noun/action:
Amy made fun of harry, standing on one leg [My understanding: "standing .." modifies action "made fun"]
Amy, standing on one leg, made fun of harry [My understanding: "standing .." modifies noun "Amy"]
If my understanding is correct, what's the difference between the meaning of the two sentences?
as you wrote, in the first sentence, "standing on one leg" describes the whole action that precedes it. if that's the case, then "standing on one leg" is HOW amy is making fun of harry. (maybe his other leg is in a cast ... or something.)
in the second, "standing on one leg" is just talking about amy. so, amy was standing on one leg for an unspecified reason, and also making fun of harry (most likely in a way that had nothing to do with the idea of standing on one leg).
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:57 pm
- Thanked: 2 times
Thanks, Ron! I just wanted to make sure my understanding is good about the change in meaning of the sentence(s) with placement of the modifier (placed next to action, alternatively placed next to noun)lunarpower wrote:what's interesting, here, is that you've basically answered your own question.divineacclivity wrote:I have a follow up question.
What is the difference between the following two sentences in terms of modifier sentence modifying noun/action:
Amy made fun of harry, standing on one leg [My understanding: "standing .." modifies action "made fun"]
Amy, standing on one leg, made fun of harry [My understanding: "standing .." modifies noun "Amy"]
If my understanding is correct, what's the difference between the meaning of the two sentences?
as you wrote, in the first sentence, "standing on one leg" describes the whole action that precedes it. if that's the case, then "standing on one leg" is HOW amy is making fun of harry. (maybe his other leg is in a cast ... or something.)
in the second, "standing on one leg" is just talking about amy. so, amy was standing on one leg for an unspecified reason, and also making fun of harry (most likely in a way that had nothing to do with the idea of standing on one leg).
- Justluck04
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 12:26 am
Ron,lunarpower wrote:keep in mind that you're looking at *wrong* answers here.
in the two choices (d) and (e), "applying..." shouldn't be a modifier at all, because it doesn't actually *modify* anything in the preceding clause -- it gives another, separate aspect of the programs. (number one, the families can move into new housing; number two, the families can apply part of the rent to a later purchase. these are different things.)
so there's really no sense in nitpicking over what it can or can't modify, because it shouldn't be a modifier at all.
[/i]
Had the original sentence been
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.
Is the -ing modifier applied correctly here..
@ Greatfan..Tried posting on Manhattan Blogs..Not so user friendly it seems
-
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 3:34 am
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.
I think this should be a valid usage of participle form..Also the sentence makes sense..
Can some expert attest the usage of -ing in this sentence?
I think this should be a valid usage of participle form..Also the sentence makes sense..
Can some expert attest the usage of -ing in this sentence?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
No. A modifier doesn't make sense here, because you're talking about two separate things:Justluck04 wrote:Had the original sentence been
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.
Is the -ing modifier applied correctly here..
1/ move into new housing
2/ apply part of the rent to a later purchase
#2 is not, in any meaningful sense, a description of #1. They're totally different things.
So, this modifier doesn't work-and neither will any other modifier!
Since these are separate goals, they should be expressed with a structure that properly portrays them as separate goals (e.g., to move into new housing and to apply part of the rent to a later purchase).
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
- magic monkey
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:08 am
- Location: China, Shanghai
Hi Ron, I got an question.lunarpower wrote:keep in mind that you're looking at *wrong* answers here.
in the two choices (d) and (e), "applying..." shouldn't be a modifier at all, because it doesn't actually *modify* anything in the preceding clause -- it gives another, separate aspect of the programs. (number one, the families can move into new housing; number two, the families can apply part of the rent to a later purchase. these are different things.)
so there's really no sense in nitpicking over what it can or can't modify, because it shouldn't be a modifier at all.
also, bear in mind that there is some flexibility here -- if a comma + -ING modifier follows a complex expression that has more than one subject+verb pair, then you may have to use a certain amount of common sense to distinguish what is modified.
the modifier still must modify the same rules, but could refer to either of the subject/verb combinations.
e.g.
i carried a bag containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks, supporting them with nutrients and heat.
here, the comma -ing modifier modifies only the second subject+verb pair. shown in color:
i carried a bag containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks, supporting them with nutrients and heat.
VS.
i dropped a bag containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks, breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives.
here, the comma -ing modifier modifies the entire preceding clause. shown in color:
i dropped a bag (containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks), breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives.
In the following post, you have said "if comma + -ing follows a clause, it should describe the action (and, at least indirectly, the subject) of that clause. "
I am thinking that in the "Complex Structure" you have said,
"i dropped a bag (containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks), breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives."
if we change the relative that clause into an comma which clause, would "breaking" still modifies "I dropped a bag", or only the "comma which clause", just grammatically.
Like in the following sentence,
"i dropped a bag containing six incubators, which enclosed baby chicks, breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives."
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
Have you ever seen this--or anything remotely like it--in an official problem?magic monkey wrote:if we change the relative that clause into an comma which clause, would "breaking" still modifies "I dropped a bag", or only the "comma which clause", just grammatically.
Like in the following sentence,
"i dropped a bag containing six incubators, which enclosed baby chicks, breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives."
If not, it's a non-issue (and thinking about it will have negative returns, in the sense of needlessly over-complicating the concept).
If you have seen this sort of thing in an official problem, then point out where.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
- magic monkey
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:08 am
- Location: China, Shanghai
Hi Ron, it doesn't appear in any correct sentence but it does in potential choices.lunarpower wrote:Have you ever seen this--or anything remotely like it--in an official problem?magic monkey wrote:if we change the relative that clause into an comma which clause, would "breaking" still modifies "I dropped a bag", or only the "comma which clause", just grammatically.
Like in the following sentence,
"i dropped a bag containing six incubators, which enclosed baby chicks, breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives."
If not, it's a non-issue (and thinking about it will have negative returns, in the sense of needlessly over-complicating the concept).
If you have seen this sort of thing in an official problem, then point out where.
Like in OG13 SC55, D and E,
"house builders offer ... programs, which enable a family to move into ..., applying the rent"
I understand structures like "which clause + comma ving" might be avoided in correct sentences, but does it mean that we can treat it as a split to cancel a choice?
in other words, i want to know that grammatically, does "applying" seem to modify the preceding which clause - programs enable to move in, or "applying" could still be understood as modifying the main SV - house builders offer?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
In the problem you've cited, the whole issue is a non-issue, because NO modifier makes sense.
In that context, "applying... is something that happens later. It's not something that happens in the same timeframe as "moving in", and it is most certainly not a description of the move-in process.
So, the use of any modifier would be nonsense in this context.
Again, it's very, very unlikely that anything like this will ever appear on the test--and, even if it does appear, it will almost certainly never be an actual dispositive issue (just as it isn't here).
This comment will surprise a lot of people (and may even destroy some people's cherished conceptions of what this exam is and isn't)--but GMAC is not in the business of trying to "trick" you with weird, convoluted, esoteric versions of single issues.
When there is complexity, that compelxity comes from the combination of many simpler concepts in a larger sentence. But, the thing you should never forget is that the simpler concepts will remain simpler concepts.
In that context, "applying... is something that happens later. It's not something that happens in the same timeframe as "moving in", and it is most certainly not a description of the move-in process.
So, the use of any modifier would be nonsense in this context.
Again, it's very, very unlikely that anything like this will ever appear on the test--and, even if it does appear, it will almost certainly never be an actual dispositive issue (just as it isn't here).
This comment will surprise a lot of people (and may even destroy some people's cherished conceptions of what this exam is and isn't)--but GMAC is not in the business of trying to "trick" you with weird, convoluted, esoteric versions of single issues.
When there is complexity, that compelxity comes from the combination of many simpler concepts in a larger sentence. But, the thing you should never forget is that the simpler concepts will remain simpler concepts.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
- magic monkey
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:08 am
- Location: China, Shanghai
Thanks Ron,lunarpower wrote:In the problem you've cited, the whole issue is a non-issue, because NO modifier makes sense.
In that context, "applying... is something that happens later. It's not something that happens in the same timeframe as "moving in", and it is most certainly not a description of the move-in process.
So, the use of any modifier would be nonsense in this context.
Again, it's very, very unlikely that anything like this will ever appear on the test--and, even if it does appear, it will almost certainly never be an actual dispositive issue (just as it isn't here).
This comment will surprise a lot of people (and may even destroy some people's cherished conceptions of what this exam is and isn't)--but GMAC is not in the business of trying to "trick" you with weird, convoluted, esoteric versions of single issues.
When there is complexity, that compelxity comes from the combination of many simpler concepts in a larger sentence. But, the thing you should never forget is that the simpler concepts will remain simpler concepts.
So is it correct to say that GMAT would most likely to avoid structures like "SVO, which clause, doing"?
Hope i didn't misunderstand your point. (I have got the meaning issue here.)
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
Too abstract for me. Can you write an actual example that looks like this? Thanks.magic monkey wrote:So is it correct to say that GMAT would most likely to avoid structures like "SVO, which clause, doing"?
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
- magic monkey
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:08 am
- Location: China, Shanghai
is it ok to write like this: (from your examples, sorry i am not capable of writing a better example)lunarpower wrote:Too abstract for me. Can you write an actual example that looks like this? Thanks.magic monkey wrote:So is it correct to say that GMAT would most likely to avoid structures like "SVO, which clause, doing"?
i dropped a bag containing six incubators, which enclosed baby chicks, supporting them with nutrients and heat.
then what about this:
i dropped a bag containing six incubators that enclosed baby chicks, breaking two of them and endangering the chicks' lives.