lunarpower wrote:

sumit88 wrote:Can someone put light on why A is wrong..??

there is nothing on the left that is parallel to "...yet being...".

lunarpower wrote: there is nothing on the left that is parallel to "...yet being...".

lunarpower wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote: The bay acted as a funnel for the tide (Pg. 142 of MGMAT SC Guide )
The verb does is missing in the sub. clause .

that's not a comparison, so the rule doesn't hold. (that is a sentence that actually says that the bay plays the role of a funnel; it doesn't compare a bay to a funnel.)

here are more examples to make things clearer.

Ron spoke at the trial as an expert


--> this is NOT a comparison; this means that ron is actually an expert, and was speaking in that capacity.

Ron spoke at the trial like an expert
Ron spoke at the trial as an expert would (note clause)
--> these are comparisons. they mean that ron is not necessarily an expert, but that he spoke in a comparable way.

sumit88 wrote:
Can someone put light on why A is wrong..??

lunarpower wrote: the gmat DOES NOT "scoff at the passive" (note "scoff", not "scuff" -- to "scuff" means to scratch something such as a wall or a shoe).
in fact, OG12 has 33 "active vs. passive" decisions; of those 33 decisions, 17 go in favor of the passive, and the other 16 in favor of the active. so it's basically fifty-fifty.

active vs. passive is a meaning-based distinction; as is the case for choosing between verb tenses, you must understand the intended meaning to make the decision properly.

lunarpower wrote:

duongthang wrote:Ron, pleas,tell me the difference between:
"Ron speak at the trial like an expert", or better, "like an expert, Ron speak at the trial. Dose this mean, Ron and the expert are similar in that they speak.

the latter one doesn't really make much sense here, so i'll just use a different set of examples. (also, "Ron speak" is not correct grammar.)

NOTE:
for the purposes of the GMAT, you will not have to distinguish between "Like X, Y ..." and "Y ..., like X". the difference is rhetorical, and rhetoric is not tested in SC.
nevertheless, because you asked, i'll explain below. be aware that you will not need the following distinction to solve any problems.

Like X, Y...
--> the rhetorical purpose of this construction is to emphasize the idea that X and Y themselves are alike because they both share some action/trait/whatever. in other words, this construction is *not* meant to mean that Y is imitating X -- it's meant to draw a general similarity between X and Y.
for instance,
Like Uruguayans, Argentinos speak Spanish.
--> this sentence just makes the point that Uruguayans and Argentinos share a language. it does *not* imply that the two groups speak Spanish in similar ways.
Argentinos speak Spanish like Uruguayans.
--> this sentence implies not only that Argentinos speak Spanish, but also that they speak it in a manner similar to Uruguayans' way of speaking.

again, this difference will not be tested, but it may help you understand the rhetorical purpose if you encounter either of these constructions in your reading.