D. is optimal. verbs in the underlined portion must be parallel.

Bryant, could you explain why option B is wrong?

for providing -> changes meaning of the sentence.
the underlined portion is supposed to describe oyster farm that has two characters: sitting & providing, not sitting for providing.

IMO:D

sungoal wrote:In an attempt to produce premium oysters, a firm in Scotland has developed a prototype
of a submersible oyster farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides ideal
conditions for the mollusks' growth.

A. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides
B. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean for providing
C. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and providing
D. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and provides
E. farm that is sitting below the surface of the ocean and it provides

OA: D

When you see COMMA + VERBing, the present participle modifier (VERBing) should refer to the SUBJECT of the preceding clause.
Thus, in A and B, sitting incorrectly refers to a firm (the subject of the preceding clause).
It is not a firm in Scotland but a FARM that sits below the surface of the ocean.
Eliminate A and B.

In C, sits is not parallel with providing. Eliminate C.
In E, is sitting is not parallel with it provides. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

D is the ans..
B modifies FARM

GMATGuruNY wrote:

sungoal wrote:In an attempt to produce premium oysters, a firm in Scotland has developed a prototype
of a submersible oyster farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides ideal
conditions for the mollusks' growth.

A. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides
B. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean for providing
C. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and providing
D. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and provides
E. farm that is sitting below the surface of the ocean and it provides

OA: D

When you see COMMA + VERBing, the present participle modifier (VERBing) should refer to the SUBJECT of the previous clause.
Thus, in A and B, sitting incorrectly refers to a firm (the subject of the previous clause).
It is not a firm in Scotland but a FARM that sits below the surface of the ocean.
Eliminate A and B.

In C, sits is not parallel with providing. Eliminate C.
In E, is sitting is not parallel with it provides. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

Hi Mitch,

You mentioned that in case of comma+verb-ing modifier, modifier always modify the subject of the previous clause. Does this rule applies to every case of comma+verb-ing modifier?

I have seen some cases in which comma+verb-ing modifier modifies the noun preceding comma.

And in some cases comma+verb-ing modifier modifies the action of the previous clause too. Could you explain both the above mentioned cases with example?

Good Discussion. Explanation (,+ing) should modify the subject of previous clause is the take away. Thanks Brian.

sungoal wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote:

sungoal wrote:In an attempt to produce premium oysters, a firm in Scotland has developed a prototype
of a submersible oyster farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides ideal
conditions for the mollusks' growth.

A. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean, and it provides
B. farm, sitting below the surface of the ocean for providing
C. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and providing
D. farm that sits below the surface of the ocean and provides
E. farm that is sitting below the surface of the ocean and it provides

OA: D

When you see COMMA + VERBing, the present participle modifier (VERBing) should refer to the SUBJECT of the previous clause.
Thus, in A and B, sitting incorrectly refers to a firm (the subject of the previous clause).
It is not a firm in Scotland but a FARM that sits below the surface of the ocean.
Eliminate A and B.

In C, sits is not parallel with providing. Eliminate C.
In E, is sitting is not parallel with it provides. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

Hi Mitch,

You mentioned that in case of comma+verb-ing modifier, modifier always modify the subject of the previous clause. Does this rule applies to every case of comma+verb-ing modifier?

I have seen some cases in which comma+verb-ing modifier modifies the noun preceding comma.

And in some cases comma+verb-ing modifier modifies the action of the previous clause too. Could you explain both the above mentioned cases with example?

A modifying phrase that begins with COMMA + VERBing typically exhibits the following characteristics:

-- the VERBing refers to the subject of the preceding clause.
-- the VERBing expresses an action that is contemporaneous with -- that takes place at the same time as -- the action of the preceding clause.
-- the modifying phrase modifies the entire preceding clause.

I have argued that even a modifying phrase that begins with including displays these characteristics:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/verb-ing-mod ... tml#394719

If you've come across what seems to be an exception, please post it.

I have some notes for appositive. Things are discrete.


Lisa has to run many errands.
Lisa's mother suffers from allergies that prevent her from leaving the house.
Combine above two sentences:
Lisa has to run many errands, allergies preventing her mother from leaving the house. (Active participle)
OR
Lisa has to run many errands, her mother prevented from leaving the house by allergies (passive participle)

It only works if the noun in question is an ABSTRACT noun (i.e. not a concrete object, person, etc). such as "activity", "finding", "idea", "notion", "statistic", etc.
John, his arms flailing in the wind, called out desperately for help.
This sort of modifier (COMMA + ABSTRACT NOUN) can be used to refer back to the WHOLE IDEA of the preceding clause.
Let's say that scientists discover that X is 60 percent of Y, and that they are shocked by this finding.

Recent studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, which has shocked many in the scientific community.
Above sentence is Incorrect because it implies that Y itself has shocked many in the scientific community. That's not true.

Recent studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, a finding that has shocked many in the scientific community.
Or
Recent studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, a statistic that has shocked many in the scientific community.
These are correct because the abstract noun "finding" or "statistic" may refer to the whole idea of the preceding clause.

James went for dinner and drinks with Mr. Easton, an outing that was much more enjoyable than working all day.
Here, "an outing" is abstract noun. It describes the whole previous clause (going for dinner and drinks).

On the other hand, COMMA + CONCRETE NOUN is normally used to refer to the preceding noun (much like "which").
James went for dinner and drinks with Mr. Easton, a consultant from the west end.
Here, "a consultant" is a concrete noun. It only describes "Mr. Easton ", not the whole idea of the preceding clause.