-
magnus opus
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:04 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
- GMAT Score:760
QUERY 1
OG12 q.111
Construction of the Roman Colosseum, which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, was completed a decade later, during the reign of Titus, who opened the Colosseum with a one-hundred-day cycle of religious pageants, gladiatorial games, and spectacles.
A. which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian,
B. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
C. which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
D. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater and begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian it
E. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, which was begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
In the explanation to this question on page742, for option D says(quoted verbatim),
There is no need to use the pronoun "it" as the subject of "was completed" because
"Roman Colosseum" (modified by phrases describing its name and the time it was begun ) already serves as the subject of the final verb. DOES THIS IMPLY THAT COLOSSEUM IS BEING CORRECTLY MODIFIED?
However in most cases(modifiers in parenthesis) we take the subject of prepositional phrase ( in this case "construction") to be qualified by the modifier, but the information in the parenthesis in the explanation clearly states that this is not the situation in the above case. How do we differentiate?
On the contrary;
Take the following example from Og 12- in the non underlined portion the modifier "....,the site" is placed after " pakistan" which is the object of the preposition "in" but it clearly modifies the subject instead "excavation" which is not the case in the question above,
QUERY2:
participal modifiers usually have a comma before them and refer to the entire preceding clause as their antecedent( as in the case of q47 og12 eagles question) or they take the subject of the previous clause as their antecedent to show either cause and effect or simultaneity of events. But in this case "enabling" is referring to "CIA" which is not the subject.
My main query is regarding the comma, which is missing in this case. DOES the lack of a comma make "enabling..." modifier OF "CIA". What is the grammatical reasoning behind this. Why can't it illogically modify discrestionary powers?
correct answer is A
186. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
(A) enabling it to withhold from the public
(B) for it to withhold from the public
(C) for withholding disclosure to the public of
(D) that enable them to withhold from public disclosure
(E) that they can withhold public disclosure of
OG12 q.111
Construction of the Roman Colosseum, which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, was completed a decade later, during the reign of Titus, who opened the Colosseum with a one-hundred-day cycle of religious pageants, gladiatorial games, and spectacles.
A. which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian,
B. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
C. which was officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, began in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
D. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater and begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian it
E. officially known as the Flavian Amphitheater, which was begun in A.D. 69, during the reign of Vespasian, and
In the explanation to this question on page742, for option D says(quoted verbatim),
There is no need to use the pronoun "it" as the subject of "was completed" because
"Roman Colosseum" (modified by phrases describing its name and the time it was begun ) already serves as the subject of the final verb. DOES THIS IMPLY THAT COLOSSEUM IS BEING CORRECTLY MODIFIED?
However in most cases(modifiers in parenthesis) we take the subject of prepositional phrase ( in this case "construction") to be qualified by the modifier, but the information in the parenthesis in the explanation clearly states that this is not the situation in the above case. How do we differentiate?
On the contrary;
Take the following example from Og 12- in the non underlined portion the modifier "....,the site" is placed after " pakistan" which is the object of the preposition "in" but it clearly modifies the subject instead "excavation" which is not the case in the question above,
QUERY2:
participal modifiers usually have a comma before them and refer to the entire preceding clause as their antecedent( as in the case of q47 og12 eagles question) or they take the subject of the previous clause as their antecedent to show either cause and effect or simultaneity of events. But in this case "enabling" is referring to "CIA" which is not the subject.
My main query is regarding the comma, which is missing in this case. DOES the lack of a comma make "enabling..." modifier OF "CIA". What is the grammatical reasoning behind this. Why can't it illogically modify discrestionary powers?
correct answer is A
186. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
(A) enabling it to withhold from the public
(B) for it to withhold from the public
(C) for withholding disclosure to the public of
(D) that enable them to withhold from public disclosure
(E) that they can withhold public disclosure of
Last edited by magnus opus on Sat Oct 09, 2010 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
