A restrictive modifier restricts what it modifies somehow and is integral to the meaning of the sentence.

A non restrictive modifier merely describes what it modifies, and if a non restrictive modifier is removed from a sentence, the sentence will retain basically the same meaning.

Restrictive: John's car that has a red stripe is in the shop.

that has a red stripe restricts which car is being discussed. It's not the car without the red stripe. It is the car that has a red stripe.

Notice that there is no comma between car and that.

Non Restrictive: John's car, which has a red stripe, is in the shop.

which has a red stripe merely describes the car. John could have multiple cars, all of which have red stripes. which has a red stripe is not defining which car is being discussed.

Notice that the non restrictive modifier is separated from the rest of the sentence by commas.

which has a red stripe can be removed from the sentence without significantly changing the meaning.

John's car is in the shop.

The sentence is still basically conveying the same thing.

Here's the version of the sentence that is created using choice E.

Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs, which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to be able to move into new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.

which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to be able to move into new housing is a non restrictive modifier modifying programs.

Such a modifier can be removed from the sentence without significantly changing the meaning.

Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.

Now you can see that this version of the sentence conveys that the builders, rather than the families, are the ones applying part of the rent.

OK, last thing.

I think in the structure, the applyings refer housing,because it the word before applying. Is that right?

When a participle or verb-ing modifier is separated from rest of sentence by a comma, the modifier does not modify the noun right before the comma. It modifies the clause or some part of the clause before the comma.

When a participle or verb-ing modifier modifies the noun to which it is adjacent, the modifier is not separated from that noun by a comma.

Sarah saw the man painting the house in bright colors.

No comma between man and painting. painting the house modifies man.

Megan worked with the man, painting the house in bright colors.

painting the house in bright colors does not modify man. It modifies the entire preceding clause, Megan worked with the man.

So in your example, applying does not modify housing. It modifies Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs.

Crystal W wrote:My question is about D and E. In the explanationg of OG, it said "applying following a nonrestrictive clause suggests incorrectly that the builders, not the family, are applying the rent." In the explanation of E, it said "The comma after programs is incorrect because the clasue is meant to be restrictive; as in D, applying will alter the meaning of the sentence." I read a lot of discussion about these two explanation but i am still confused. can someone explain more about nonrestrictive and restrictive clause? Also, according to the mean of the sentence, it is clear that hte subject of the apply is family, but in these two choices, I think in the structure, the applyings refer housing,because it the word before applying. Is that right?
Thanks in advance!

Check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/many-house-b ... 87773.html

GMATGuruNY wrote:

Crystal W wrote:My question is about D and E. In the explanationg of OG, it said "applying following a nonrestrictive clause suggests incorrectly that the builders, not the family, are applying the rent." In the explanation of E, it said "The comma after programs is incorrect because the clasue is meant to be restrictive; as in D, applying will alter the meaning of the sentence." I read a lot of discussion about these two explanation but i am still confused. can someone explain more about nonrestrictive and restrictive clause? Also, according to the mean of the sentence, it is clear that hte subject of the apply is family, but in these two choices, I think in the structure, the applyings refer housing,because it the word before applying. Is that right?
Thanks in advance!

Check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/many-house-b ... 87773.html

Thank you and I have read your link, but I still have two small points feel confused. First, I believe "apply" should be parallel to "a conventional down payment", according to the meaning of sentence, because these two are two steps of the "rent-to-buy program". Second, Why I cannot believe "applying" modifies the "family"? Or we cannot judge "applying" modifies "builders" or "family" so that cause bizarrerie?
Thanks in advance!

Hello Everyone!

Let's tackle this question, one problem at a time, and narrow down the options to get the correct answer quickly! First, let's start by taking a look at the original question, and then highlighting the major differences between the options in orange:

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

After a quick glance over the options, there are a few key differences we can focus on:

1. How they begin (punctuation / subject-verb agreement)
2. to be able to move vs. to move (parallelism)
3. to apply vs. applying (parallelism)

Let's start with #1 on our list, which is a combination of punctuation and subject-verb agreement. Since the punctuation varies so much from one option to the next, let's focus on subject-verb agreement first. To figure out what type of verb we need, we need to answer the question, "What is enabling families to move into new housing?" Rent-to-buy programs. Since "programs" is plural, we need a plural verb to match! Let's see which options use a plural verb, and rule out the ones that don't:

(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

We can eliminate options C & D because they use the singular "enables" with a plural subject, which does not agree in number. Now that we're down to 3 options, we can focus on the next problem.

Since both #2 and #3 on our list have to do with parallelism, let's combine them and figure out which options use parallel structure. Remember that whenever we talk about a subject doing more than one action, each action needs to be written using parallel verbs, wording, or structure.

(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 --> NOT PARALLEL

(B) programs that enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into new housing and to apply --> PARALLEL

(E) programs, which enable a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to be able to move into new housing, applying --> NOT PARALLEL


There you have it - option B is the correct choice! It's the only option that uses the correct subject-verb agreement and parallelism.


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

Crystal W wrote:My question is about D and E. In the explanationg of OG, it said "applying following a nonrestrictive clause suggests incorrectly that the builders, not the family, are applying the rent." In the explanation of E, it said "The comma after programs is incorrect because the clasue is meant to be restrictive; as in D, applying will alter the meaning of the sentence." I read a lot of discussion about these two explanation but i am still confused. can someone explain more about nonrestrictive and restrictive clause? Also, according to the mean of the sentence, it is clear that hte subject of the apply is family, but in these two choices, I think in the structure, the applyings refer housing,because it the word before applying. Is that right?
Thanks in advance!

Check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/many-house-b ... 87773.html

when there are 2 remaning choices, check word by word the 2 choices and find the grammatical minor errors such as agreement, plural/singular pronoun.
regarding choice d,
comma+doing modifies the whole preceding clause, not "someone to do" such as "families to move". so, "applying..." refer to "which" and this reference is not logical.