lunarpower wrote:

atulmangal wrote: You are right @Ron, this example is from OG and OG doesn't include such error. Actually we were discussing this question and same concepts related to COMMA + AND usage in this thread (link given below). A fellow mate modified the Op A, and asked whether this modified version is valid or not. I thought there is an error of COMMA + AND as i mentioned in my earlier post but need an Expert's confirmation that m i thinking correct, that's why posted the same.

you are correct; this version would be best written without that comma.

please, please, please -- if you are posting sentences that you have written yourself (or that other non-professionals have written), then SAY SO when you post those sentences.
otherwise -- if you present the sentence without context, as was originally done here -- you're going to get hundreds of posters studying these (often incorrect) amateur versions as if they were legitimate official sources.

thanks in advance.

Thanks for your post Ron. Yes, i will definitely take care to mention the necessary information (as u suggested) in future.

Thanks again!!!

Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Good discussion - and, Atul, I asked you about FANBOYS in another thread but just picked that up here...thanks! More fodder for making fun of Apple fanboys (and, admittedly, I have an iPhone, iPad, and Macbook, so I'm probably making fun of myself...)


In that first example, I agree with Atul that the first "and" is used to separate independent clauses and is used properly there because it introduces a subject (graduates) right after.

The second "and" in that first example - honestly, I can't see the GMAT testing this with the comma and its relationship to the third item in a list after "and". I'd bet a pretty large sum of money that the GMAT will just be consistent any time it has a list like that so that it's never the decision point for a right-or-wrong answer. Growing up I had multiple teachers give me different opinions on whether you use a comma there or not, and I've seen it written so often either way that I just don't think it's a valid, testable item for the GMAT. So I don't see anything wrong with that first one at all.


For the second example, the comma after "and" introduces a modifier: "without a safe and educational place for their children". And because the modifier is nonessential to the meaning of the sentence, the commas are justified. So the second sentence is fine, too - and the rationale is that the commas don't belong to "and", but rather belong to the modifier. It's very similar to saying:

Few will be able to pay the full cost on their own. Without a safe place for their children, many won't be able to keep working.

All that we're doing in the "and" sentence is linking those two independent clauses with the word "and", but that introductory modifier for "many won't be able to..." is still a valid modifier, and it needs to be separated by commas.

But what about this sentence? Can you explain to me why this is correct?

In 2003, apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as, AND in certain neighborhoods even higher than, those in Manhattan.

Why in this sentence,"AND" here after the comma followed by a incomplete sentence. This is the question for SC, and I have trouble to understand "and" followed by the sentence.

Thanks.

edited

I post the explanation but then i was a bit doubtful, hence removing my post and i will wait for Ron's comment.

atulmangal wrote:edited

I post the explanation but then i was a bit doubtful, hence removing my post and i will wait for Ron's comment.

Okay, but thanks for the explanation!

atulmangal wrote:edited

I post the explanation but then i was a bit doubtful, hence removing my post and i will wait for Ron's comment.

I read the post you removed earlier, but when I read other posts regard the usage of "and", I have a question about the modifier. If the clause after "and" is modifier, then the whole sentence should be "...... ,and,(modifier)...." , yet this sentence is "..... ,and (modifier)....."

yvonne0923 wrote:

atulmangal wrote:edited

I post the explanation but then i was a bit doubtful, hence removing my post and i will wait for Ron's comment.

I read the post you removed earlier, but when I read other posts regard the usage of "and", I have a question about the modifier. If the clause after "and" is modifier, then the whole sentence should be "...... ,and,(modifier)...." , yet this sentence is "..... ,and (modifier)....."

Hi, okay so u read that post...well let me put something here....first of all the part followed by AND (after AND) is a phrase not a clause.

Second, please see below:

In 2003, apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as, AND in certain neighborhoods even higher than, those in Manhattan.

i divided the sentence in 3 parts:

part in green is the clause in fact main clause.

part in blue is i believe an ESSENTIAL MODIFIER, including the word AND

part in Orange is a part of the main clause

so, finally the case is, we have main clause and an essential modifier is inserted between that main clause separating the part in orange color.

if u chop the ESSENTIAL MODIFIER, then u get this sentence:

In 2003, apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as those in Manhattan.

So, u notice 2 things:

1) the resulted sentence is a complete sentence
2) the COMMA's are removed, u have seen in thousands of sentences that a modifier is almost always inserted in between COMMA's, unless the modifier is coming in the initial of the sentence, for ex In 2003 is also a modifier coming in the beginning of the sentence. when u chop the modifier, u also chop the COMMA's so in sum u consider COMMA's as a part of modifier...that means, don't look the sentence in this way: COMMA + AND ---> violation of rule
but look the sentence in this way, COMMA + MODIFIER + COMMA....correct
surprisingly, here the modifier is starting with the word AND and that creates confusion as we are reading it as COMMA + AND NOT COMMA + MODIFIER + COMMA....
so if u look the sentence in this way, as i explained, your given sentence is correct.

3) if u remove that essential modifier, there is a slight change in meaning. The essential modifier is suggesting that at some place the price is even more while if u remove the modifier that mean the price is as high as...but not more.

why i removed my post was, the modifier is started with AND, this looks a bit suspicious to me...i again say, if m correct that the part followed by AND is a modifier then the placement of COMMA is correct...no problem with that. This concept i already discussed with experts and they approved the same.

Thanks
Atul

atulmangal wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:

atulmangal wrote:edited

I post the explanation but then i was a bit doubtful, hence removing my post and i will wait for Ron's comment.

I read the post you removed earlier, but when I read other posts regard the usage of "and", I have a question about the modifier. If the clause after "and" is modifier, then the whole sentence should be "...... ,and,(modifier)...." , yet this sentence is "..... ,and (modifier)....."

Hi, okay so u read that post...well let me put something here....first of all the part followed by AND (after AND) is a phrase not a clause.

Second, please see below:

In 2003, apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as, AND in certain neighborhoods even higher than, those in Manhattan.

i divided the sentence in 3 parts:

part in green is the clause in fact main clause.

part in blue is i believe an ESSENTIAL MODIFIER, including the word AND

part in Orange is a part of the main clause

so, finally the case is, we have main clause and an essential modifier is inserted between that main clause separating the part in orange color.

if u chop the ESSENTIAL MODIFIER, then u get this sentence:

In 2003, apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as those in Manhattan.

So, u notice 2 things:

1) the resulted sentence is a complete sentence
2) the COMMA's are removed, u have seen in thousands of sentences that a modifier is almost always inserted in between COMMA's, unless the modifier is coming in the initial of the sentence, for ex In 2003 is also a modifier coming in the beginning of the sentence. when u chop the modifier, u also chop the COMMA's so in sum u consider COMMA's as a part of modifier...that means, don't look the sentence in this way: COMMA + AND ---> violation of rule
but look the sentence in this way, COMMA + MODIFIER + COMMA....correct
surprisingly, here the modifier is starting with the word AND and that creates confusion as we are reading it as COMMA + AND NOT COMMA + MODIFIER + COMMA....
so if u look the sentence in this way, as i explained, your given sentence is correct.

3) if u remove that essential modifier, there is a slight change in meaning. The essential modifier is suggesting that at some place the price is even more while if u remove the modifier that mean the price is as high as...but not more.

why i removed my post was, the modifier is started with AND, this looks a bit suspicious to me...i again say, if m correct that the part followed by AND is a modifier then the placement of COMMA is correct...no problem with that. This concept i already discussed with experts and they approved the same.

Thanks
Atul

Atul, thanks for your very detailed post about the usage of "and" according to this sentence. I will wait for other posts to confirm this later. Thanks again!

@Atul, read your post and in dilemma. What I got is you are suspicious about a modifier begining with AND. Even I am not sure about it so lets leave it to experts for clarification.

In between, I have interpreted this sentence in the following way. Not sure if its the right way.

In 2003, ----> Opening Modifier
apartment rental costs - Main clause
in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as --->phrase 1
, AND ---> connects two phrases.
in certain neighborhoods even higher than, ----> phrase 2
those in Manhattan. --->main clause continued.

Please comment on this.

@Pranay

Hi, m sorry brother but m 100% sure you are wrong at this point:

in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as --->phrase 1

This is not a phrase...why ??? i show you...

apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as

here, don't get confuse that COSTS is a VERB...COSTS is a NOUN and VERB is ROSE....costs rose...any confusion???

As u already know, a phrase can not have VERB in it so "in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as" is not a PHRASE....got it????

This means, this whole bunch:

"apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as" is a part of MAIN CLAUSE and "those in Manhattan" is again the balance part of that MAIN CLAUSE. Hence, we can conclude that the complete clause is:

apartment rental costs in most neighborhoods of Brooklyn rose almost as high as those in Manhattan

while ,AND in certain neighborhoods even higher than, is a MODIFIER

Hope u agree with me...if have any doubt please post..!!!

Thanks Atul for clarification.

Thanks Ron,

I think I have been trying to focus on things like these which is a kind of drifting my attention while scanning through the answer options.

I learned two points from most of your posts,

1. Follow legitimate sources such as OG12, OG supplements and learn stuff from them.
2. Prioritize concepts while answering the questions.

Thanks again for reiterating point 2 in your above post.