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

Redeem

Fickle 0hG - Adjective to

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:45 am

Fickle 0hG - Adjective to

by allfta » Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:52 pm
Hi friends.
I am confusing when can I use adjective to infinitive.

First, OG says in problem 133.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

DE have problem that the to phrase makes the purpose of the law is requiring something.
But, OG permits to infinitive in problem 128.

Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
(C) suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
(D) to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
(E) to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved

I know we can use to phrase to modify preceding Noun, but cannot figure out when I cannot use it. OG's explain is too short to clarify this.


Another issue is that, in option C in upper prob. 128, OG say with phrase cannot company with clause.
But isn't it possible to regard the word evolved as an adjective but not as a verb?
For example "with its arm folded" is ok. isn't it?
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:17 pm
Location: Berkeley, Ca
Thanked: 30 times
Followed by:21 members

by KevinRocci » Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:28 am
Hi! Let's see if I can help! :)
allfta wrote:Hi friends.
I am confusing when can I use adjective to infinitive.

First, OG says in problem 133.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

DE have problem that the to phrase makes the purpose of the law is requiring something.
But, OG permits to infinitive in problem 128.
So I can see the trouble here. And it is not easy. But this sentence demonstrates a subtle meaning of an infinitive phrase. Phrases that use "to" and a verb can have a meaning similar to "because." That is, an infinitive could imply a cause-and-effect relationship. So OG in this question is saying that the infinitive phrase could imply that the reason the law exists is to put this device on the nets when the real reason is to protect the turtles. With the infinitive it is almost like saying:

"... in order to[/b] require that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles."
allfta wrote:Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
(C) suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
(D) to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
(E) to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved

I know we can use to phrase to modify preceding Noun, but cannot figure out when I cannot use it. OG's explain is too short to clarify this.
So it is not a matter of when or when you should not use an infinitive phrase. There are not a lot of hard rules about using infinitives. Ultimately, you need to decide what is the most clear and concise way of conveying the information in the passage. Sometimes this will mean that you need to use an infinitive and sometimes it will mean that you will not use an infinitive.

In this problem, the issue is using "that" twice. This is an awkward construction that should be avoided. The use on an infinitive allows us to avoid that wordy and awkward phrasing. So in formal English we prefer "to suggest that" as opposed to "that supports that." Make a note of this.
allfta wrote:Another issue is that, in option C in upper prob. 128, OG say with phrase cannot company with clause. But isn't it possible to regard the word evolved as an adjective but not as a verb? For example "with its arm folded" is ok. isn't it?
In your example sentence you are correct, and sometimes "evolved" can be used as an adjective. But it all comes down to the syntax of the sentence. We have to look at how the words are organized and ordered to know if it is being used as verb or as an adjective. Let's take a look:

"...its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel..."

So we have a subject "trunk" and an adverb "originally" and then "evolved." This is standard word ordering in English-subject, adverb, and verb. The key here is to ask yourself what "evolved" is modifying? If it is an adjective, it has to describe a noun, but there is no noun nearby for it to describe so we can't assume that it will be an adjective.

As such, we have an independent clause here, so we cannot use "with" before it.

I hope that you found some of this helpful. :)
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:45 am

by allfta » Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:01 pm
KevinRocci wrote:Hi! Let's see if I can help! :)
allfta wrote:Hi friends.
I am confusing when can I use adjective to infinitive.

First, OG says in problem 133.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare
Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

DE have problem that the to phrase makes the purpose of the law is requiring something.
But, OG permits to infinitive in problem 128.
So I can see the trouble here. And it is not easy. But this sentence demonstrates a subtle meaning of an infinitive phrase. Phrases that use "to" and a verb can have a meaning similar to "because." That is, an infinitive could imply a cause-and-effect relationship. So OG in this question is saying that the infinitive phrase could imply that the reason the law exists is to put this device on the nets when the real reason is to protect the turtles. With the infinitive it is almost like saying:

"... in order to[/b] require that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles."
allfta wrote:Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggests that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal, and its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
(C) suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal with its trunk originally evolved
(D) to suggest that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal and its trunk originally evolved
(E) to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved

I know we can use to phrase to modify preceding Noun, but cannot figure out when I cannot use it. OG's explain is too short to clarify this.
So it is not a matter of when or when you should not use an infinitive phrase. There are not a lot of hard rules about using infinitives. Ultimately, you need to decide what is the most clear and concise way of conveying the information in the passage. Sometimes this will mean that you need to use an infinitive and sometimes it will mean that you will not use an infinitive.

In this problem, the issue is using "that" twice. This is an awkward construction that should be avoided. The use on an infinitive allows us to avoid that wordy and awkward phrasing. So in formal English we prefer "to suggest that" as opposed to "that supports that." Make a note of this.
allfta wrote:Another issue is that, in option C in upper prob. 128, OG say with phrase cannot company with clause. But isn't it possible to regard the word evolved as an adjective but not as a verb? For example "with its arm folded" is ok. isn't it?
In your example sentence you are correct, and sometimes "evolved" can be used as an adjective. But it all comes down to the syntax of the sentence. We have to look at how the words are organized and ordered to know if it is being used as verb or as an adjective. Let's take a look:

"...its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel..."

So we have a subject "trunk" and an adverb "originally" and then "evolved." This is standard word ordering in English-subject, adverb, and verb. The key here is to ask yourself what "evolved" is modifying? If it is an adjective, it has to describe a noun, but there is no noun nearby for it to describe so we can't assume that it will be an adjective.

As such, we have an independent clause here, so we cannot use "with" before it.

I hope that you found some of this helpful. :)

Great explain kenvin. Thanks!
Can I add one more question of your reply?
what if the word "originally" in my second question were removed?
Then can I the word "evolved" as an adj. modifying trunk and the whole with phrase can be used legitimate
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1