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

Redeem

Predicate verb - eGmat law in question. Please help

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:32 am
Thanked: 5 times

Predicate verb - eGmat law in question. Please help

by vishal.pathak » Tue Dec 06, 2011 9:17 am
Hi eGmat,

I tried to send a PM to you but the message didn't go out of my outbox

https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-spectacu ... tml#434034

"I loved her" is a sentence posted by Avik which clearly does not have any helping verb. This is probably against your law, posted in

https://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=522

which says

"Note that verb-ing not used with is/are/was/were/am does not act as the verb of the sentence."

You have mentioned this law for only verb-ing modifiers but I read, at a different place, that this law also applies to verb-ed modifiers.

Please help Payal

Regards,
Vishal
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:15 am
Thanked: 149 times
Followed by:32 members
GMAT Score:760

by avik.ch » Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:24 am
I could not find in your reference where egmat has written that ed verb always need a helping verb.

Its only mention about ing verb !!

Some more example from MGMAT SC , ( As this is the most trusted source )-

I declared the election a fraud.
She decided to start a company.
His example influenced me.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:6 members

by gunjan1208 » Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:47 am
Hi,

it has to be only about "ing"

Avik is right is this. Can we have expert help here?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:32 am
Thanked: 5 times

by vishal.pathak » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:34 am
gunjan1208 wrote:Hi,

it has to be only about "ing"

Avik is right is this. Can we have expert help here?
I am unable to find a source where i read about verb-ed modifiers. I guess, without any proofs to support my statement, I must believe that you guys are correct

Thanks for correcting me

Regards,
Vishal
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: US
Thanked: 527 times
Followed by:227 members

by e-GMAT » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:41 am
Hi Everyone,

Yes this rule applies only to verb-ing words. Extending this to verb-ed words is a very big mistake. And you know, when you are in such doubt, just take simplest of examples...

Mary cooks food. - cooks is the verb - simple present tense.
Mary is cooking food. - is cooking is the verb - present continuous tense
Mary cooked food. - cooked is the verb - simple past tense.

Now since these kind of simple sentences you use in your day to day spoken English, you know that these are correct. So from this you will know right away that cooked is very much a verb. You do not need a helping verb to make it a verb. Likewise, is cooking is a verb. See we need a helping verb here. In fact if we simply said "Mary cooking food", it would be incorrect.

@Vishal, I am not sure where you read that the verb-ing word rule is applicable to verb-ed words as well. Such extrapolations will end up hurting your fundamentals in the language.

I hope this helps.

Thanks,

Payal
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:32 am
Thanked: 5 times

by vishal.pathak » Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:12 am
e-GMAT wrote:Hi Everyone,

Yes this rule applies only to verb-ing words. Extending this to verb-ed words is a very big mistake. And you know, when you are in such doubt, just take simplest of examples...

Mary cooks food. - cooks is the verb - simple present tense.
Mary is cooking food. - is cooking is the verb - present continuous tense
Mary cooked food. - cooked is the verb - simple past tense.

Now since these kind of simple sentences you use in your day to day spoken English, you know that these are correct. So from this you will know right away that cooked is very much a verb. You do not need a helping verb to make it a verb. Likewise, is cooking is a verb. See we need a helping verb here. In fact if we simply said "Mary cooking food", it would be incorrect.

@Vishal, I am not sure where you read that the verb-ing word rule is applicable to verb-ed words as well. Such extrapolations will end up hurting your fundamentals in the language.

I hope this helps.

Thanks,

Payal
Hi Payal,

Thanks for taking your time out to clear my doubts. I have gone through your blog on SC and it has indeed helped a lot.

I had read about verb-ed in some unauthentic source and my apologies to the forum for wasting evryone's time for this. However, my belief in the extrapolation of the law was strengthened after reading the following post. I am sure that my interpretation of your answer must be incorrect, but it will really help if your could share a few more wise words on my interpretation below

https://www.beatthegmat.com/adjective-cl ... tml#434084

In the above post, option E states that

American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which, characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

In the above sentence, pronoun 'which' should stand for the nearest noun. The closest noun is stories.
So the 2nd clause of the above sentence can be written as
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

So here, I feel that characterized is a verb but in your post you have mentioned that this clause lacks definite verb.

Apologies for the subject stating "eGmat law in question". I did it to catch your attention. I tried sending you a message but the message didn't go out of my outbox. I sought your reply in the above thread but even that didn't work. Since I desperately needed your help in this issue, so I chose to mention "eGmat" in the subject of this post. Apologies once again

Regards,
Vishal
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: US
Thanked: 527 times
Followed by:227 members

by e-GMAT » Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:38 pm
Your doubt stems from a gap in your understanding of verb-ed modifiers and verbs.

Lets first understand this from meaning perspective.
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

If "characterized" is indeed a verb of the subject "stories", then the action of characterized is performed by the stories. right?? But is this logical - do stories characterize? Or are the stories themselves characterized by sentences combining stilted...Lets take a simple example:

1: Tom colored the table with bright pink pastel colors. "colored" = verb
2: Tables colored with bright pink pastel colors. - "colored" = verb-ed modifier
3: Table is colored with bright pink pastel colors. - "is colored" = verb

Notice how "colored" is verb in sentence 1 since Tom actually is the one who does the action of "coloring". But in sentence 2, "colored" is not a verb. Table itself does not actually color. Table is indeed colored with bright pink pastel colors. So in sentence 3, "is colored" is the verb.

As you can see, verb-ed modifiers are derived from passive verbs. You basically remove the helping verb - is/are/be/was/were from the passive construction and you get a verb-ed modifier.

Stories are characterized by sentences combining stilted...- are characterized is verb in passive voice.
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted... - characterized is verb-ed modifier
The author characterized each and very aspect of the plot in a very pictorial manner. - characterized is verb in active voice.

I hope this clarifies your doubt. As you can see, a verb can either act as verb-ed modifier or a verb. It depends on the context in which it is used. So when you are confused about whether the word acts as modifier or verb, you may ask the question - does the subject or noun actually perform that action or would this verb in passive voice make sense with the subject/noun.

Thanks,

Payal
[/u]
Top
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 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:02 am
vishal.pathak wrote: In the above post, option E states that

American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which, characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

In the above sentence, pronoun 'which' should stand for the nearest noun. The closest noun is stories.
So the 2nd clause of the above sentence can be written as
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

By the way, the portion between the commas (characterized by sentences combining stilted) is non-essential. So, we cannot rephrase it as:

Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

Couple of additional things:

1. There is a comma after which while what you have rephrased does not have a comma between stories and characterized

2. Even if you were to rephrase it the way you have suggested, it is not a clause. Think about the following group of words:

(a) Indian team characterized by players combing talent and diligence.

(b) Players combing talent and diligence characterized the Indian team

As you would perhaps appreciate, (a) this is not a complete sentence, while (b) is. This would also hopefully help you appreciate that (a) does not have any main verb (and hence, by the way, (a) is not a clause at all; it is a phrase). (b) does have a main verb characterized and is a complete sentence (and hence, is a clause).

3. The way option E is framed, if you were to go down the path of substituting which with stories, the structure should be: Stories academic language with playful non-sequiturs. Let us take an example:

Indian team, which, despite being plagued by multiple injuries, won the match against a much stronger team.

In the above sentence, if we were to substitute which with Indian team, the clause in the second part of the sentence that you should be looking at, would be:

Indian team won the match against a much stronger team.

Since despite being plagued by multiple injuries is a non-essential, you should not attempt to form the clause in the second part of the sentence:

Indian team despite being plagued by multiple injuries.
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
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:32 am
Thanked: 5 times

by vishal.pathak » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:37 am
e-GMAT wrote:Your doubt stems from a gap in your understanding of verb-ed modifiers and verbs.

Lets first understand this from meaning perspective.
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

If "characterized" is indeed a verb of the subject "stories", then the action of characterized is performed by the stories. right?? But is this logical - do stories characterize? Or are the stories themselves characterized by sentences combining stilted...Lets take a simple example:

1: Tom colored the table with bright pink pastel colors. "colored" = verb
2: Tables colored with bright pink pastel colors. - "colored" = verb-ed modifier
3: Table is colored with bright pink pastel colors. - "is colored" = verb

Notice how "colored" is verb in sentence 1 since Tom actually is the one who does the action of "coloring". But in sentence 2, "colored" is not a verb. Table itself does not actually color. Table is indeed colored with bright pink pastel colors. So in sentence 3, "is colored" is the verb.

As you can see, verb-ed modifiers are derived from passive verbs. You basically remove the helping verb - is/are/be/was/were from the passive construction and you get a verb-ed modifier.

Stories are characterized by sentences combining stilted...- are characterized is verb in passive voice.
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted... - characterized is verb-ed modifier
The author characterized each and very aspect of the plot in a very pictorial manner. - characterized is verb in active voice.

I hope this clarifies your doubt. As you can see, a verb can either act as verb-ed modifier or a verb. It depends on the context in which it is used. So when you are confused about whether the word acts as modifier or verb, you may ask the question - does the subject or noun actually perform that action or would this verb in passive voice make sense with the subject/noun.

Thanks,

Payal
[/u]
Thanks a ton, Payal. It has been a great help

Regards,
Vishal
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:32 am
Thanked: 5 times

by vishal.pathak » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:41 am
EducationAisle wrote:
vishal.pathak wrote: In the above post, option E states that

American writer Donald Barthelme is renowned for his formally inventive, epiphanic short stories, which, characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

In the above sentence, pronoun 'which' should stand for the nearest noun. The closest noun is stories.
So the 2nd clause of the above sentence can be written as
Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

By the way, the portion between the commas (characterized by sentences combining stilted) is non-essential. So, we cannot rephrase it as:

Stories characterized by sentences combining stilted, academic language with playful non-sequiturs

Couple of additional things:

1. There is a comma after which while what you have rephrased does not have a comma between stories and characterized

2. Even if you were to rephrase it the way you have suggested, it is not a clause. Think about the following group of words:

(a) Indian team characterized by players combing talent and diligence.

(b) Players combing talent and diligence characterized the Indian team

As you would perhaps appreciate, (a) this is not a complete sentence, while (b) is. This would also hopefully help you appreciate that (a) does not have any main verb (and hence, by the way, (a) is not a clause at all; it is a phrase). (b) does have a main verb characterized and is a complete sentence (and hence, is a clause).

3. The way option E is framed, if you were to go down the path of substituting which with stories, the structure should be: Stories academic language with playful non-sequiturs. Let us take an example:

Indian team, which, despite being plagued by multiple injuries, won the match against a much stronger team.

In the above sentence, if we were to substitute which with Indian team, the clause in the second part of the sentence that you should be looking at, would be:

Indian team won the match against a much stronger team.

Since despite being plagued by multiple injuries is a non-essential, you should not attempt to form the clause in the second part of the sentence:

Indian team despite being plagued by multiple injuries.
Thanks Ashish, for more insights. I have it all saughted out in my head, will not repeat this mistake again

Thanks indeed

Regards,
Vishal
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1