shovan85 wrote:Hi,
Can any one please help me on this:
When I see "BEING" in a sentence I discard that option blindly, but can someone please explain how "BEING" works? And why always discarded? Is there any chance of getting correct options with "Being"?
Regards,
Shovan85
BEING:
We can discuss the issue in two phases:
1. When should we use "BEING"?
Being will be used in the following cases:
1.
As a gerund:
Being seriously committed to the work is the only way to succeed.
 Something IS the only way to succeed.
This something has worked as NOUN. So, Being has been used here as NOUN.
2. In the passive of progressive tenses:
Active: They are playing football.
Passive: Football is being played by them
Active: We were writing essays.
Passive: Essays were being written by us.
When NOT to use BEING:
1. If we see that the sentence is correct without BEING, eliminate BEING.
Example:
Incorrect: Being the chairman of the department, Mr. Karim has made the decision.
Correct: The chairman of the department, Mr. Karim has made the decision.
=> Look, without "
BEING", the sentence is fine.
Here, the key point is in "
case of apposition", we should not use
"BEING".
Another example:
Shourav Ganguli, being the Indian cricket captain, has made fifty runs.
--Revised: Shourav Ganguli, the Indian cricket captain, has made fifty runs.
=> Look the appositive is fine without BEING.
Conclusion: If BEING is found to introduce the Appositives, just kill it.
Two real examples from GMATPREP:
#001:Simply because they are genetically engineered does not make it any more likely for plants to become an invasive or persistent weed, according to a decade-long study published in the journal Nature.
A) Same
B) because it is genetically engineered does not make a plant any more likely to
C) being genetically engineered does not make it any more likely that plants will
D) being genetically engineered does not make a plant any more likely to
E) being genetically engineered does not make a plant any more likely that it will become
Answer: D
#002:Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Answer: E
Try this two sentence with the technique explained above. If you can explain the reasons why BEING is correct, it is sure that you have understood the concept.
Thanks.
