Comma+with vs Comma+ing

BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

This topic has expert replies

Post new topic Locked

Previous Topic Next Topic

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

Comma+with vs Comma+ing

by mankey » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:07 pm

Dear Experts

Could you please help me on this one:

Are comma+with and comma+ing work same? I have tried understanding the difference by reading different posts but have found that they work "almost" the same way if not "exactly" the same way.

Could you please highlight the differences, if there are any.

Thanks.

Quote

Source: Beat The GMAT — Sentence Correction | Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:07 pm

essaysnark: Legendary Member; Posts: 795; Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:41 am; Thanked: 177 times; Followed by:85 members

by essaysnark » Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:27 am

Not quite understanding your query, mankey - would you please post an example or two and we'll work through it with you?

EssaySnark

EssaySnark has MBA application guides for HBS, Stanford, Booth, Wharton, NYU and pretty much any other school you can name - including a fully revised and expanded 2015 Columbia essay guide!
https://essaysnark.com/bookstore/
* * * * * * *
The Indians' Guide to Getting In maps out everything you need to evaluate your own profile and select your schools. https://essaysnark.com/ssguide/quicksnar ... ans-guide/
* * * * * * *
MILITARY CANDIDATES! We've got some pro bono offers just for you: https://essaysnark.com/military-mba/
* * * * * * *
Follow EssaySnark on Twitter!

Quote

Brian@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 1031; Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm; Location: Malibu, CA; Thanked: 716 times; Followed by:255 members; GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:45 pm

Hey Mankey,

Thanks for the PM on this - and, you know, what's tough with a connector like "with" is that there are tons of ways to use it so it's hard to distill it into one hard-and-fast rule. But the way I've seen this done on official questions (two correct answers are below, with the "answer" portion underlined...these questions are I think from OG10 but maybe OG11), "with" is used as a connector that sets up a modifier quite similar to the ,-ing form.

The diet of the ordinary Greek in classical times was largely vegetarian-vegetables,
fresh cheese, oatmeal, and meal cakes, with meat as a rarity.

***Here "with" adds modification to the verb phrase "diet was largely vegetarian". You could probably replace it with an -ing modifier like "including meat only on rare occasions".

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

Here "with" adds modification to "monkeys sleeping". You could probably replace it with the modifier "hanging their arms and legs..." (although that could create confusion as to whether it was the visitors or monkeys who hung their limbs...).

So... I think you're thinking the right way when it comes to "with". It's not identical to the -ing modifier but close enough that it fits a very similar role. And so you should assess it in the same way - when you see it, ask whether it provides a clear and logical description of what it seeks to describe.

Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.

Quote

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:51 am

Dear Brian

Thanks so much for replying.

I remember from one of the previous posts, Mitch Hunt had explained the usage of "comma+with", where he had mentioned that "comma+with" usually modifies the noun which is being modified by the verb in the preceding clause.

Please comment if this is explanation is wrong or if I got it wrong?

Also if this is correct, could you please explain me the "monkey" sentence on that lines, since I see to many verbs in the preceding clause?

Thanks
Mankey

Quote

avik.ch: Legendary Member; Posts: 641; Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:15 am; Thanked: 149 times; Followed by:32 members; GMAT Score:760

by avik.ch » Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:16 am

mankey wrote:Dear Brian

I remember from one of the previous posts, Mitch Hunt had explained the usage of "comma+with", where he had mentioned that "comma+with" usually modifies the noun which is being modified by the verb in the preceding clause.

can you please provide the link of this explanation. How can "comma + with" modify a noun ?

"with after comma", always acts as a verb modifier modifying an action or an entire clause, i.e. it acts as an adverb.
John went out of the room, with his head help high. ( you are describing how john went out of the room)

If there is no comma, then it modifies the noun. In this case we can use "with", when we are describing some inherent quality of the noun, Here are some OG example :

OG-12, #112 : clans with less xxxxxxxxx/ clans whose......... ( both the usage is correct when we modify it in possesive form. The answer is A due to some other difference)
I bought a car with.... ( quality of something)

Quote

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:10 am

Dear Avik

Refer to the following page: https://www.beatthegmat.com/correct-usag ... 92756.html

Refer to the following line: "The result in B is that each seems to refer to FOOD, the subject of the verb being modified:"

Thanks.

Quote

GMATGuruNY: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 15539; Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm; Location: New York, NY; Thanked: 13060 times; Followed by:1906 members; GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:02 am

avik.ch wrote:
mankey wrote:Dear Brian

I remember from one of the previous posts, Mitch Hunt had explained the usage of "comma+with", where he had mentioned that "comma+with" usually modifies the noun which is being modified by the verb in the preceding clause.

can you please provide the link of this explanation. How can "comma + with" modify a noun ?

"with after comma", always acts as a verb modifier modifying an action or an entire clause, i.e. it acts as an adverb.
John went out of the room, with his head help high. ( you are describing how john went out of the room)

If there is no comma, then it modifies the noun. In this case we can use "with", when we are describing some inherent quality of the noun, Here are some OG example :

OG-12, #112 : clans with less xxxxxxxxx/ clans whose......... ( both the usage is correct when we modify it in possesive form. The answer is A due to some other difference)
I bought a car with.... ( quality of something)

Here is the incorrect answer choice to which Mankey refers in his post above:

Indian food comprises many different styles of cooking, with each a product of its regional influences...

The issue here is EACH: since with each a product modifies the preceding VERB (comprises), a reader might construe that EACH refers to the subject of this verb (Indian food). The intended meaning, however, is not that EACH FOOD is a product of its regional influences. Now onto the OA:

Indian food comprises many different styles of cooking, each a product of regional influences...

Here, EACH clearly refers to the closest preceding noun (styles of cooking), conveying the intended meaning: that EACH STYLE OF COOKING is a product of regional influences.

Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Quote

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:25 am

Dear Mitch

Could you please explain the "with" thing with the following example, which was given by Brian:

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

What is "with" modifying in the above sentence?

Logicwise, I can make out but the problem is I see two verbs in this sentence "have looked" and "have seen" and the subject here is Visitors and not Monkeys. So is there a possibility that "with" modifies visitors and not monkeys!

Please explain.

Thanks

Quote

GMATGuruNY: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 15539; Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm; Location: New York, NY; Thanked: 13060 times; Followed by:1906 members; GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:28 am

mankey wrote:Dear Mitch

Could you please explain the "with" thing with the following example, which was given by Brian:

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

What is "with" modifying in the above sentence?

Logicwise, I can make out but the problem is I see two verbs in this sentence "have looked" and "have seen" and the subject here is Visitors and not Monkeys. So is there a possibility that "with" modifies visitors and not monkeys!

Please explain.

Thanks

As Brian noted, with arms and legs hanging serves as an adverb modifying SLEEPING (a verb functioning as an adjective). HOW are the monkeys SLEEPING? With arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

Quote

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

by lunarpower » Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:23 pm

it appears i'm a little bit late to this party, but i wanted to add the following comment:
in general, prepositional phrase modifiers are flexible -- they may require the reader's common sense to resolve their meaning.

for instance, the following two examples are both correct:
i bought a belt with a removable buckle.
i bought a belt with my gift certificate.
in the first of these examples, "with a removable buckle" modifies the noun "belt". in the second example, "with my gift certificate" modifies the action of buying the belt.

the summaries given by mitch in this thread are already pretty good, so i don't have much to add there. instead, my purpose is to caution you against thinking too formulaically about this particular modifier -- or, indeed, about modifiers in general.
most modifiers have a certain degree of flexibility in their use, more out of necessity than anything else: if every modifier had exactly one type of usage, then many ideas would become impossible to express!

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 Ã Ron en franÃ§ais
Voit esittÃ¤Ã¤ kysymyksiÃ¤ Ron:lle myÃ¶s suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vÃªtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vÃªtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Quote

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:22 am

Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans [that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors [to see more patients]], spending...

in this case, the COMMA -ING modifier could grammatically modify either the blue clause or the purple clause (which is nested within the blue one). from context, it should be clear that the modifier is meant to modify the purple clause.
(this is normally what happens in this type of situation with nested clauses: an attached COMMA -ING modifier will normally modify the embedded, smaller clause. there is no need to memorize the statistical rule for this, however -- in most cases, such as this one, the context will make quite clear what is being modified and what is not.)

the COMMA -ING modifier modifies the action of the purple clause, and also applies to the subject of the purple clause -- namely, the relative pronoun "that". this relative pronoun, in turn, refers to "lower-end insurance plans". so the rule still works.

Dear Ron

Can I say this sentence, explained by you is similar to the monkey problem, where the stuff after comma (with arms etc in monkey problem and spending etc in workers problem) are both refering back to the embedded phrase.

Please help.

Thanks.

Quote

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

by lunarpower » Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:32 pm

mankey wrote:Dear Ron

Can I say this sentence, explained by you is similar to the monkey problem, where the stuff after comma (with arms etc in monkey problem and spending etc in workers problem) are both refering back to the embedded phrase.

Please help.

Thanks.

i'm sorry, but you'll have to remind me which problem that is, by means of a link or some other kind of reference. thanks.

Quote

mankey: Legendary Member; Posts: 627; Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am; Thanked: 4 times; Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:37 am

Dear Ron

Both the problems were present on this thread but probably I should have present them a little better:

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans [that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors [to see more patients]], spending...

in this case, the COMMA -ING modifier could grammatically modify either the blue clause or the purple clause (which is nested within the blue one). from context, it should be clear that the modifier is meant to modify the purple clause.
(this is normally what happens in this type of situation with nested clauses: an attached COMMA -ING modifier will normally modify the embedded, smaller clause. there is no need to memorize the statistical rule for this, however -- in most cases, such as this one, the context will make quite clear what is being modified and what is not.)

the COMMA -ING modifier modifies the action of the purple clause, and also applies to the subject of the purple clause -- namely, the relative pronoun "that". this relative pronoun, in turn, refers to "lower-end insurance plans". so the rule still works.

Question: Can I say this sentence, explained by you is similar to the monkey problem, where the stuff after comma (with arms etc in monkey problem and spending etc in workers problem) are both refering back to the embedded phrase?

Thanks.

Quote

apex231: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 127; Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 10:04 am; Thanked: 5 times

by apex231 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:19 pm

Hi Mitch, how do we know that "with" is not modifying "visitors to the park have often looked at"?

Thanks!

GMATGuruNY wrote:
mankey wrote:Dear Mitch

Could you please explain the "with" thing with the following example, which was given by Brian:

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

What is "with" modifying in the above sentence?

Logicwise, I can make out but the problem is I see two verbs in this sentence "have looked" and "have seen" and the subject here is Visitors and not Monkeys. So is there a possibility that "with" modifies visitors and not monkeys!

Please explain.

Thanks
As Brian noted, with arms and legs hanging serves as an adverb modifying SLEEPING (a verb functioning as an adjective). HOW are the monkeys SLEEPING? With arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

Quote

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

by lunarpower » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:06 am

mankey --

mankey wrote:Question: Can I say this sentence, explained by you is similar to the monkey problem, where the stuff after comma (with arms etc in monkey problem and spending etc in workers problem) are both refering back to the embedded phrase?

yes.

note that, if you find comma + -ING or comma + "with" after just the subject of a sentence (i.e., not after an entire clause), then they work differently: in that case, they just modify that noun/subject.
for instance:
A bola, with three or four balls on small ropes branching out from a main lasso, was used by South American gauchos to rope calves.
--> here, the "with" part just modifies "a bola".
Tim, still sobbing uncontrollably three days after the disaster, was unable to work.
--> here, the "sobbing" modifier just modifies tim.

Quote

Post new topic Locked

Comma+with vs Comma+ing

This topic has expert replies

Comma+with vs Comma+ing

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT Course Reviews

Admissions Consulting Reviews