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

Redeem

What's wrong with this sentence structure

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:22 am
Thanked: 19 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

What's wrong with this sentence structure

by capnx » Thu Apr 21, 2011 9:05 pm
Someone please give a little explanation as to why the following structure is grammatically wrong/not preferred:

To increase efficiency, more cars were produced.
Due to higher costs, less spending is needed.

My tutor says I should not write/use structures like the above. Could someone provide the grammatical reason behind the incorrectness? Is it because it's adverbial clause plus a main clause without a subject?

Thanks
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 61 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:740

by force5 » Thu Apr 21, 2011 10:49 pm
The first sentence starts with infinitive phrase and thus should have a subject. Since it doesnt have a subject its incorrect.

second subject again is an adverbial clause and has a same problem. besides the use of "due to" in the second sentence is incorrect. should be replaced by "because of"
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1574
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am
Thanked: 88 times
Followed by:13 members

by aspirant2011 » Thu Apr 21, 2011 10:52 pm
"Due to" should be used in a sentence when it can be replaced by "caused by" and after replacing the sentence still remains logical............
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 61 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:740

by force5 » Thu Apr 21, 2011 11:19 pm
another mistake i see in second sentence is the use comparative form- higher costs. i feel that a simpler adverb should have been used instead of comparative. high cost...
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

by atulmangal » Thu Apr 21, 2011 11:39 pm
To increase efficiency, more cars were produced.

The first sentence starts with infinitive phrase and thus should have a subject. Since it doesnt have a subject its incorrect.
@ force,

can u please justify your point in red i didn't get this rule?? second, if u are suggesting that a noun is missing in the infinitive phrase, then the word "efficiency" is a noun there...please elaborate your point.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 61 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:740

by force5 » Fri Apr 22, 2011 12:20 am
yes my point is that the sentence doesnt have a subject. Who is the doer of the sentence. The sentence has a noun.. thats fine. but it still doesnt have a subject. who is doing this entire act???? besides it doesnt have a verb hence its still a phrase.

i was answering to the question- why this form is incorrect or not preferred. since the sentence starts with a phrase it lacks the clarity of thought. the better way would have been

the company produced more cars to increase .... or
more cars were produced to increase ....

in this construct the dilemma is that "to increase efficiency" is being modified by "more cars"....
the problem is are we modifying "to increase" or "efficiency" in both ways... the context is not very clear.
alternatively, i can also explain this using- cause and effect

example----
to increase score, more study is needed.

the reason why this sentence is awkward is because we have written the effect first instead of the cause. this could have been corrected by saying...

study more to increase your score.
or
you should study more to increase ...
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:22 am
Thanked: 19 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

by capnx » Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:46 am
Thanks force5. Your explanation is very good. But I have some other questions about infinitive and passive voice.

In your example, you used "More cars were produced to increase efficiency" and you said this is ok. My question is, in this case, is there a clear actor or subject for the infinitive or is the doer of the action not needed? I thought the placement of the infinitive doesn't make or break the grammatical acceptance:

1. The company produced more cars to increase efficiency.
2. To increase efficiency, the company produced more cars.
3. More cars were produced to increase efficiency.
4. To increase efficiency, more cars were produced.

The first 2 are of course ok. If the 4th is wrong because there is no doer, why the 3rd is ok?

Thanks
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:07 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Thanked: 162 times
Followed by:45 members
GMAT Score:760

by Jim@Grockit » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:23 am
capnx wrote:Thanks force5. Your explanation is very good. But I have some other questions about infinitive and passive voice.

In your example, you used "More cars were produced to increase efficiency" and you said this is ok. My question is, in this case, is there a clear actor or subject for the infinitive or is the doer of the action not needed? I thought the placement of the infinitive doesn't make or break the grammatical acceptance:

1. The company produced more cars to increase efficiency.
2. To increase efficiency, the company produced more cars.
3. More cars were produced to increase efficiency.
4. To increase efficiency, more cars were produced.

The first 2 are of course ok. If the 4th is wrong because there is no doer, why the 3rd is ok?

Thanks
They're all fine, and I think you are seeing why they are fine grammatically -- the movement of an adverbial modifying phrase to the front of a sentence is acceptable and common. The problem is not with the passive voice; it is absolutely acceptable to have sentences in the passive voice without a prepositional phrase indicating the agent (as Mistakes were made or The crime was solved is fine without by my mother or by the detective).

So why would your tutor tell you not to do that? Ultimately, adverbial modifiers are most at home close to the verb, and they are most clear there. That said, there are many contexts where greater clarity is achieved by movement of the phrases away from the verb:

In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice, they aren't. (the context for the comparison moved to the front of the clauses)
vs
Theory and practice are the same in theory; they aren't, in practice.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1