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

Redeem

querry

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:56 am
Thanked: 13 times

querry

by vivek.kapoor83 » Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:22 pm
Hi,
I would appriciate, if any1 can help in fig out the SC and IC in this and explain why this is SC n IC.

Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game. Leaving her team at a time when we needed her.
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 12 times

by piyush_nitt » Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:30 pm
For sentence to be IC , it should have subject + verb

Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game - IC

Dietz - Subject
exemplified - Verb

Leaving her team at a time when we needed her - fragment

No IC. Leaving her team - Participle Pharse

Hope that helps.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:56 am
Thanked: 13 times

by vivek.kapoor83 » Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:38 pm
ya piyush,u r rite.
I am not able to recognize fragment like this.
Would appriciate if u can throw some lite on this. I am havig diff in picking up dependent clause. How to do ta
t
.Wht abt folllowin eg : - A few of the less serious fellows would go into a bar for a steak dinner and a few glasses of beer. After this meal, they were ready for anything.
In the above eg. 2nd part of sentece isnt creating fragment as it is dependin upon the 1st sentence in a way by asking 'after which meal' , so it is nto a Dependent clause or is it.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 12 times

by piyush_nitt » Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:05 pm
All dependent clauses starts with dependent word e.g although , when , how ..etc etec

you can check this link ..

https://owl.ccd.edu/writ_resources/hando ... d_Exp.html

and both the sentences are IC.


A few of the less serious fellows would go into a bar for a steak dinner and a few glasses of beer.

few - Subject
would go - verb

After this meal, they were ready for anything.

After this meal - Prepositional Pharse
they - subject
were - verb
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 12 times

by piyush_nitt » Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:21 pm
check this link :

https://www.ccc.commnet.edu/sensen/part1/five/index.html
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: New Delhi , India
Thanked: 13 times

by ronniecoleman » Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:47 am
Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game. Leaving her team at a time when we needed he

Exemplified is the verb
by walking off the field .. preposition modifier

Leaving her team... participle modifier...

above sentence suffers from sentence fragmentation...
Admission champion, Hauz khaz
011-27565856
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2134
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:26 pm
Thanked: 237 times
Followed by:25 members
GMAT Score:730

Re: querry

by logitech » Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:49 am
vivek.kapoor83 wrote:Hi,
I would appriciate, if any1 can help in fig out the SC and IC in this and explain why this is SC n IC.

Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game. Leaving her team at a time when we needed her.
First of all, try to understand the sentence and see how the two sentences are linked together logically.

1) Coach is doing something
2) Whatever he does causes something.

So these two sentences need to be linked to each other.

The core of the sentence below is:

Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game

Dietz exemplified this behavior

Coach is modiying the DIETZ

by walking off the field in the middle of a game is modifying the verb EXEMPLIFIED.

So you really do not have any problem in this sentence.

SUBJECT+VERB

The second sentence has no subject or working verb:

Leaving her team at a time when we needed her

You might be confused with the green part but actually if you pay attention, that part is only modifying the TIME.


And the orange part is actually modifying the whole previous sentence. ( Cause --> Effect )

Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game, leaving her team at a time when we needed her.
LGTCH
---------------------
"DON'T LET ANYONE STEAL YOUR DREAM!"
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 11:31 pm
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:760

by rogue_rohit » Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:12 am
One useful method I use to determine this is -

The meaning of the sentence is never complete without main clause. Main clause can stand alone on its own whereas a dependent clause can not. Probably you know the above definition already, but see how this is applied to differentiate between the two types of clauses

Case 1: Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game. Leaving her team at a time when we needed her

The sentence you see makes sense and has subject and verb


Case 2 :Coach Dietz exemplified this behavior by walking off the field in the middle of a game. Leaving her team at a time when we needed her

The sentence seems incomplete. We do not know the time period when this event happened (tense) and neither do we know who did this. You can add a lot of combinations of Verbs and Subjects at the start of the sentence and the sentence will still make sense E.g. John/Samantha is/was/had been leaving her team at a time when we needed her


Using this test you can develop an eye to recognize the dependent and main clause and after some practice you probably would do it quite intuitively.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:14 am
I received a PM asking me to respond.

I like rogue's suggestion to look at the two sentences separately.

Ok, so subjects are nouns and verbs are, well, verbs, right? And in order to have an independent clause, we have to have a subject and verb that match, and that subject and verb can't be part of some modifier, such as a prepositional phrase, a noun modifier, whatever.

The first sentence of Case 1 starts with a noun (Coach Dietz) and follows with a verb (exemplified). There's no modifying word (preposition, etc) before... so we've got a standard subject-verb setup here and, therefore, an independent clause.

The second sentence of Case 1 starts with an -ing word. -ing words are tricky - they can be nouns, but they can also be verbs, adjectives, or adverbs. If it's a noun and has a matching verb, then we could have a standard subject-verb setup. So look for verbs in the sentence. "Needed" is a verb. But that goes with the noun "we." There aren't any other verbs. So "leaving" can't be serving as the subject of the sentence because there's no matching verb to go with it.

Now let's go examine the one verb we did notice: needed. That one does have a matching noun: we. BUT we also have to look before these two words to see whether there are any "clue" words that indicate a modifier. In this case, we have the "clue" word "when." That indicates a modifier, therefore a dependent clause.

We have no other verbs with which to match a subject in this sentence... so it is dependent, not independent.

Let's take that "when" example from before and look at it slightly differently:
When she fell asleep, she snored loudly.

We've got the noun+verb "she fell" and the noun+verb "she snored." Are these dependent or independent? "She fell" begins with "when," so that's dependent. "She snored" doesn't have any "modifier clue" before it (and after the comma), so that's independent.

If you're struggling with what words qualify as "modifier clues," you might want to start keeping a list as you find them in problems. Prepositions are always a modifier clue. Who, which, where, and when are also always modifier clues. -ing words can go either way, so you have to examine those. And there are a lot of others - start actively looking for the clues and keeping lists so you can memorize them.

By the way, here's an example of an -ing word that does function as a subject in an independent clause: Riding ponies is fun. Riding = subject, is = verb. (Note: this is an unusual sentence structure, but it is valid. The speaker is not trying to say that ponies are fun; rather, the speaker is trying to say that the act of riding is fun.)
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:56 am
Thanked: 13 times

by vivek.kapoor83 » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:12 am
Thanks Stacy for the gr8 explanation
Wt abt this one :

A few of the less serious fellows would go into a bar for a steak dinner and a few glasses of beer. After this meal, they were ready for anything.

Here, After is a preposition, then does that mean 2nd sentence is SC .
Pls explain this as well
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:57 am
Both sentences are complete / independent. In the second one, "After this meal" is a modifier, so it is dependent. "they were" is a subject+verb without any modifier clue before them (and after the comma), so that part is independent.

Basically, if you see commas, the commas "set off" different phrases and clauses, so consider the things you see on different sides of a comma separately. (A phrase does not include a verb; a clause does include a verb.)

After the rain, the flowers blossomed. We've got two things to consider: the part before the comma and the part after. The part before the comma contains a modifier clue ("after") but the part after the comma does not.

A few of the less serious fellows would go into a bar for a steak dinner and a few glasses of beer.

The structure of the above sentence is:
Subject (a few) prepositional phrase (of the less serious fellows) verb (would go) prep phrase (into a bar) prep phrase (for a steak dinner) coordinating conjunction indicating parallelism (and) noun part of prep phrase parallel to previous prep phrase and taking the preposition "for" (a few glasses) prep phrase (of beer).

After this meal, they were ready for anything.
prep phrase (after this meal), subject (they) verb (were) adjective (ready) prep phrase (for anything)
dependent phrase, independent clause
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:56 am
Thanked: 13 times

by vivek.kapoor83 » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:15 am
that means
After the meal,they were ready for anyting

is an independent clause...despite of having dependent phrase in it
if it would hv been like this

After they ate the meal, they were ready for anything.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:29 am
You can combine dependent phrases and clauses with an indepedent clause. As long as you have an independent claus in there somewhere, it is a complete sentence.

So your new example now has a dependent clause before the comma and an independent clause after the comma. Because it's got an independent clause, it's a complete sentence. If you only had "After they ate the meal period" you'd have just a dependent clause and that would be a sentence fragment.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:37 am
Can someone please help me with following clause analysis:

Before he died, the good Earl of Kent, who had still attended his old master's steps from the first of his daughters ill usage to this sad period of his decay, tried to make him understand that it was he who followed him under the name of Caius; but Lear's care crazed brain at that time could not comprehend how that could be, or how Kent and Caius could be the same person.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:42 am
Anothr one where I am quite confused:

When the Athenians in the war with the Lacedaemonians received man defeats both by sea and land, they sent a message to the Oracle of Jupiter Ammon, to ask the reason why they who erected so many temples to the gods, and adorned them with such costly offerings, should be less successful than the Lacedaemonians, who fell so short of them in all these particulars.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1