Present Participle vs Appositive

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:44 pm

Present Participle vs Appositive

by breaktheGMATwall » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:50 pm
Looking at OG 12 SC#38

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights
and for changes in the
married women's property laws.

Not able to understand why we can't use

arguing in a treatise ?

options B states
arguing in a treatise for equal political and legal
rights for women -

from what I understand
present participle can be used when two actions are happening at the same time.
as in X published y, arguing Z

is this understanding incorrect or is the formation " arguing in treatise "not correct ?
Source: — Sentence Correction |

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 8:06 am
Thanked: 18 times

by Neo Anderson » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:04 pm
X published y, arguing Z
you are correct is using -ing here, however here z modifies the x and not y!!
in the question
In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights and for changes in the
married women's property laws.
the intention is to modify y and to say that this treatise argued for.....
now try the question again, probably it will help!

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:44 pm

by breaktheGMATwall » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:05 pm
Neo Anderson wrote:
X published y, arguing Z
you are correct is using -ing here, however here z modifies the x and not y!!
in the question
In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights and for changes in the
married women's property laws.
the intention is to modify y and to say that this treatise argued for.....
now try the question again, probably it will help!

Thanks for your reply Neo,
Can't understand the fact that arguing should modify Y. Isn't it more logical to think that
X ( Some person) is arguing in a treatise
rather than
Y ( Some discourse) is arguing in a treatise.

Could you help with that please ?

User avatar
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 Apr 21, 2012 7:12 pm
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

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:42 pm
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 91 times
Followed by:46 members

by EducationAisle » Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:24 am
In the context of the sentence, Discourse on Women is the treatise. So, basically treatise is an appositive for Discourse on Women.

Perhaps you can now appreciate that this meaning is not coming out clearly in A or B. In fact, the act of publishing discourse and the act of arguing in treatise might be interpreted as disjointed activities.
Ashish
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:

a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana

b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi

• Page 1 of 1