Verbal Review 2ndEdition - Modifier - experts help

[GMATMadeEasy]

sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of[/i boundaries in the ocean created by] water layers of different temperature and densities

A. prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of

B. prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by

C. its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

D. its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of

E. preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by

OA is C i absolute phrase.. all good.

But why A is wrong ?

[deep.amangmat]

You may check explanation at this link.
https://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=413

See if that helps.

[GMATMadeEasy]

thanks. I read that . All other choices are very well explained except this one .

For incorrect answer choice A, what is written :

This sentence does not communicate the meaning effectively. Thus clearly, this sentence has meaning error.

I do not understand why so ?

[deep.amangmat]

I hear you @GMATMadeEasy.

"Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities."

I marked choice A as incorrect because verb-ed modifier modifies preceding noun and in this sentence it does not make sense for "prevented..." to modify distances.

Now I did read the official explanation for this question. And I was stumped by it. It says that dissipating is an intransitive verb and that is why acoustic energy cannot be its object. I did not think that we needed to memorize these different types of verbs as well.

What do you say?

[deep.amangmat]

Hi @GMATMadeEasy, I just sent a PM to one of the experts. Hopefully we will able to get more clarity on the subject.

Aman.

[Ashley@VeritasPrep]

sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of[/i boundaries in the ocean created by] water layers of different temperature and densities

A. prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of

B. prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by

C. its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

D. its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of

E. preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by

OA is C i absolute phrase.. all good.

But why A is wrong ?

Hi,

So first, with respect to the OG explanation that "dissipating" can't be transitive, I must say that's just wrong. It's true that "dissipating" *usually* doesn't take an object, but it definitely CAN be transitive, as most any dictionary should confirm. It's also true that even if you used "dissipating" transitively, you wouldn't really use it in the sense of saying that something dissipated its own something, as is done here ("sound" dissipates its own "acoustic energy,")--but even so, "dissipating" CAN be transitive. So that's a rare case of what I think is truly a mistake in an OG explanation (though I still think C is certainly the best choice). What I don't like about A is pretty minor: "prevented as a result of" sounds off to me; "prevented by" sounds much better. The "boundaries in the ocean" play the role in this sentence of the agents who prevent, so a normal passive voice construction would use "by" here. X was prevented by Y. I think the phrase "as a result of" would want to be followed some situation, as in "As a result of the traffic, I arrived late" or "As a result of the flooding, school was closed." But these sentences don't mean that the traffic or the flooding was an agent of anything -- school wasn't closed BY the flooding... it was closed by the superintendent of someone, as a result of the flooding. In our OG sentences, the acoustic energy is literally prevented BY the boundaries (from dissipating).

[lunarpower]

@ashley -- fyi, i had a hard time following your post because it's not divided into paragraphs (or into any other smaller thoughts). just letting you know.

"prevented as a result of" sounds off to me; "prevented by" sounds much better.

there's an actual error of meaning here.
"as a result of" suggests indirect causation. in other words, "X happened as a result of Y" generally means that X was not done by Y itself, but, rather, that Y set into motion a chain of events that eventually led to X.

e.g.

200 people were killed by the explosion --> this sentence means that the explosion itself actually killed 200 people.

200 people were killed as a result of the explosion --> this sentence suggests that the explosion caused other effects (the rupture of gas lines, the collapse of buildings, etc.), which in turn caused 200 people to die. this sentence would be inappropriate to describe an explosion that directly killed 200 people.

--

in the sentence at hand, the water layers directly prevent the energy from dissipating, so "as a result of" is inappropriate and "by" is correct.

[vikram4689]

"as a result of" suggests indirect causation. in other words, "X happened as a result of Y" generally means that X was not done by Y itself, but, rather, that Y set into motion a chain of events that eventually led to X.

e.g.

200 people were killed by the explosion --> this sentence means that the explosion itself actually killed 200 people.

200 people were killed as a result of the explosion --> this sentence suggests that the explosion caused other effects (the rupture of gas lines, the collapse of buildings, etc.), which in turn caused 200 people to die. this sentence would be inappropriate to describe an explosion that directly killed 200 people.

--

in the sentence at hand, the water layers directly prevent the energy from dissipating, so "as a result of" is inappropriate and "by" is correct.

1) can you please elaborate above distinction. i am not able to carry this learning to other sentences for e.g. would following OG sentence be classified as direct/indirect cause
as a result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, later generations lost all but the Iliad and Odyssey

2) following quote seems to describe "as a result of" as DIRECT causation. am i missing some context

In D, as a result of boundaries implies that the boundaries themselves are RESULTING in something. Not possible; only an ACTION can result in something. Eliminate D.

source - https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-verbal-sc ... tml#465906

[lunarpower]

1) can you please elaborate above distinction. i am not able to carry this learning to other sentences for e.g. would following OG sentence be classified as direct/indirect cause
as a result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, later generations lost all but the Iliad and Odyssey

the distinction discussed above doesn't exist in this example, because "VERBed by" isn't possible here.

take a look at the example above -- it involves a passive construction ("were killed"). that sort of thing can be used with by, but it can also be used with as a result of.
this example, on the other hand, contains "later generations lost..." -- an active construction. there's no way to use that sort of thing with by, so there's no distinction to make.

2) following quote seems to describe "as a result of" as DIRECT causation. am i missing some context

In D, as a result of boundaries implies that the boundaries themselves are RESULTING in something. Not possible; only an ACTION can result in something. Eliminate D.

source - https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-verbal-sc ... tml#465906

in that quote, mitch is making a different distinction: namely, you can't say that something is a "result of" a concrete object. this is correct; things result from actions or events, not from things.

[vikram4689]

1) can you please elaborate above distinction. i am not able to carry this learning to other sentences for e.g. would following OG sentence be classified as direct/indirect cause
as a result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, later generations lost all but the Iliad and Odyssey

the distinction discussed above doesn't exist in this example, because "VERBed by" isn't possible here.

take a look at the example above -- it involves a passive construction ("were killed"). that sort of thing can be used with by, but it can also be used with as a result of.
this example, on the other hand, contains "later generations lost..." -- an active construction. there's no way to use that sort of thing with by, so there's no distinction to make.

can i infer that in active voice both "as a result of" & "by" means direct causation. however, in passive voice "as a result of" implies "indirect causation" whereas "by" still implies "direct causation"

2) following quote seems to describe "as a result of" as DIRECT causation. am i missing some context

In D, as a result of boundaries implies that the boundaries themselves are RESULTING in something. Not possible; only an ACTION can result in something. Eliminate D.

source - https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-verbal-sc ... tml#465906

in that quote, mitch is making a different distinction: namely, you can't say that something is a "result of" a concrete object. this is correct; things result from actions or events, not from things.

based on mitch's distinction can i infer than "as a result of" will always an action noun e.g. destruction, explosion. Hence,

both of following sentences are correct because increasing & working are action nouns
as a result of increasing his car's speed, he slipped on the road
as a result of working hard, he topped the college

both of following sentences are incorrect because speed & hard-work are not action nouns
as a result of increased speed, he slipped on the road
as a result of his hard work, he topped the college

[lunarpower]

can i infer that in active voice both "as a result of" & "by" means direct causation. however, in passive voice "as a result of" implies "indirect causation" whereas "by" still implies "direct causation"

it's not normally possible to use "by" with the active voice. so, as i stated above, this distinction is nonexistent for the active voice.

both of following sentences are incorrect because speed & hard-work are not action nouns
as a result of increased speed, he slipped on the road
as a result of his hard work, he topped the college

no, these would be fine. basically, you can use "a result of" with most nouns that aren't concrete or physical things. you can use it with
... actions
... abstract concepts (as a result of her philosophy, Bernice does xxxxxx
... qualities of things (like his increased speed above)

by contrast, a boundary is a physical entity.