[email protected] wrote:I think egmat and the GMatguru have already given a wonderful explanation. You could always see them and get your doubts cleared.

Intended i got it wrong as i thought 'intended' modified the mutual funds which was wrong.

Intended modifies portfolios and thats the correct usage.

option A is wrong. 'With the intention to' might be correct in regular English but I do not think that this is correct in Gmat....

Ok. Quick question. Does your post help anyone??

If i'm posting this question in the thread in which experts have replied then doesn't it mean that I have a doubt in it? Is it really difficult to understand this? Have I not made it clear that I have a doubt? Have I not repeated my doubt a number of times to present what I mean? Is your reply an answer to that?

Are people in this forum interested in listening to your views? Have you quoted an established law to support your belief? Have you quoted some expert's comment to support your belief?

What have you achieved by your post above???

Think, please think

Regards,
Vishal

vishal.pathak wrote:

vikram4689 wrote:

In this question the noun before verb-ed modifier (intended) is funds. Now funds itself is a part of a different modifier. We are ignoring this modifier. Does it mean that verb-ed modifier can never modify a noun in another modifier and should always modify either the subject or object of the clause

.
Verbed modifier would modify noun before modifier because preceding modifier is a NON-ESSENTIAL modifier and hence sentence should make sense even when the modifier is removed.

It is clear that the modifier is non essential and removing it will not have any effect on the MEANING of the sentence. The question here is, what prevents 'intended' to modify funds. Is there an exception to the touch rule?

We need to use some common sense. Here is the OA:

Asset allocators create portfolios, often in the form of mutual funds, intended to turn in good results in both "bull" and "bear" markets.

If intended modifies funds, then we have one non-essential modifier (intended to turn in good results) modifying ANOTHER non-essential modifier (often in the form of mutual funds). The implication is that the remainder of the sentence -- all on its own -- conveys the essential meaning of the sentence. Omitting the modifiers, we get:

Asset allocators create portfolios.

This sentence feels incomplete; it doesn't convey sufficient meaning for a GMAT SC. It should be clear that the point of the sentence is to tell us WHAT KIND of portfolios are created by asset allocators:

Asset allocators create portfolios intended turn in good results in both "bull" and "bear markets.

This sentence feels complete and conveys the intended meaning. Hence, we know that intended to turn in good results is an ESSENTIAL modifier describing the PORTFOLIOS.

with the intention work as an adverb modify the whole sentence and refers to the subject. this case is similar the case of doing
learning english, I feel better.

learning work as adverb and refer to subject . some grammar book say doing is both adverb and adjective.

so the reason why A is wrong simply because "with intention to" is too far from subject.