The discussion here regarding placement of verb modifier "between 2000 and 2010" has shown me one thing - many of you do not feel comfortable placing verb modifiers within comma pairs in the middle of the clause. Let's understand this aspect in further detail.
I will begin with a direct quote from official guide
Modification Problems: Modifiers should be positioned so it is clear what word or words they are meant to modify. If modifiers are not positioned clearly, they can cause illogical references or comparisons, or distort the meaning of the statement."
Thus, the underlying principle is that the modifier should be placed in such a manner that there is no ambiguity in its reference. We will apply this fundamental principle on a few official sentences. For the sake of our discussion, we will consider only correct answer choices in this part.
A: OG12- Question#31 - Correct Choice D.
Even though many of her colleagues were convinced that genes were relatively simple and status, Barbara McClintock adhered to her own more complicated ideas about how genes might operate, and in 1983, at the age of 81, was awarded a Nobel Prize for her discovery that the genes in corn are capable of moving from one chromosomal site to another.
Notice the placement of the modifier "at the age of 81" in the non-underlined portion of the sentence. This modifier modifies the verb - was awarded.
There are a total of three descriptors of this verb:
when - in 1983,
when - at the age of 81,
what - a Nobel Prize. There is no ambiguity about what entity these modifiers modify. Now notice how one of these modifiers has been placed within a comma pair.
Now could there be other ways of writing this sentence - yes definitely. We can place the two modifiers later in the clause as shown (but still separated using comma pair).
Even though many of her colleagues were convinced that genes were relatively simple and status, Barbara McClintock adhered to her own more complicated ideas about how genes might operate, and was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1983, at the age of 81, for her discovery that the genes in corn are capable of moving from one chromosomal site to another.
As you can see, both versions of the sentence are correct. There is no ambiguity in the meaning of the sentence. The basic principle applies. Let's now consider another official sentence:
B: OG12- Question #11 - Correct Choice D.
There are several ways to build solid walls using just mud or clay, but the most extensively used method has been to form the mud or clay into bricks, and, after some preliminary air drying or sun drying, to lay them in the wall in mud mortar.
Notice the placement of the modifier "after some preliminary air drying or sun drying". This modifier modifies the "to verb" - to lay. Notice how this modifier is separated within a comma pair. There is no ambiguity in its reference.
Now would this modifier be placed elsewhere - yes definitely. It could have been easily placed at the end of the sentence as shown:
There are several ways to build solid walls using just mud or clay, but the most extensively used method has been to form the mud or clay into bricks, and to lay them in the wall in mud mortar after some preliminary air drying or sun drying.
Both versions communicate the same meaning and are correct.
Now let's look at the construction of the correct choice in this e-GMAT question:
C: e-GMAT Question - Correct Choice E
The $10.7 billion ski and snowboarding industry, which has centers in 38 states and employs 187,000 people directly or indirectly, lost, between 2000 and 2010, $1.07 billion in revenue, owing to the warming trend that forces half the nation's ski areas to open late and almost half to close early.
Notice that the placement of the modifier "between 2000 and 2010" is absolutely correct. It clearly modifies the verb - lost. In fact in this sentence there are two descriptors of this verb: when - between 2000 and 2010, what - $1.07 billion in revenue. Compare this with the official question #31 above. As with the official sentences above, this sentence can also be written correctly in more than one way.
"¢
Between 2000 and 2010, the $10.7 billion ski and snowboarding industry, which has centers in 38 states and employs 187,000 people directly or indirectly, lost $1.07 billion in revenue, owing to the warming trend that forces half the nation's ski areas to open late and almost half to close early.
"¢ The $10.7 billion ski and snowboarding industry, which has centers in 38 states and employs 187,000 people directly or indirectly, lost $1.07 billion in revenue between 2000 and 2010, owing to the warming trend that forces half the nation's ski areas to open late and almost half to close early.
Take away - Just because you see a verb modifier in a comma pair, do not doubt its correctness. If the reference is clear and unambiguous, the modifier is correct.
Let's look at a case in which such modifier is indeed incorrect.
Incorrect Modifier Reference - OG12- Question #3
Although various eighteenth- and nineteenth-century American poets had professed an interest in Native American poetry and had pretended to imitate Native American forms in their own works, until almost 1900, scholars and critics did not begin seriously to study traditional Native American poetry in native languages.
In this sentence the placement of
"until almost 1900" is not correct since it can modify either the verb in preceding clause - had professed and had pretended - or the verb in the clause that follows - did not begin. So in this case the placement of this modifier within the comma pair creates confusion since it could modify either of the two verbs. And hence this must be corrected.
So when it comes to modifiers, the fundamental principle remains the same. Modifiers should be positioned so it is clear what word or words they are meant to modify.
