STRATEGY 2 - USE OF MODIFIERSHow does GMAC use this strategy: There are a finite number of commonly used modifiers. These modifiers typically play well-defined role. You may find below the list of modifiers and what they typically modify.
e-GMAT customers may view the concept file “Types of Modifiers” to find more details on this topic.
Lets take a
simple example below:
So here is the scene that I picture. Cat is swift. It caught the rat. Now lets check this sentence below.
Now the scene that I picture is – cat swiftly grabbed the rat. So per this sentence, I no longer know whether the cat is generally swift or not. But I do know that the cat acted swiftly and caught the rat.
So changing the modifier from “adjective” to “adverb” leads to change in the meaning communicated by the sentence. This is exactly how GMAT may introduce a difference in meaning.
OFFICIAL QUESTION 1 – OG12 – Q#126Now lets take an official question:
The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual t
hat, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses.
A. that, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses
B. that create unconscious physiological responses in turn
C. creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses
D. to create, in turn, physiological responses that are unconscious
E. who creates unconscious physiological responses in turn
Intended meaning from Choice A: The intended meaning of the sentence from choice A can be inferred as follows:
1. Use of lie detectors is based on a certain assumption. Here is the assumption
2. Lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
3. These emotional reactions then create unconscious physiological responses.
Note that “that clause” in this sentence clearly modifies – emotional reactions. Yes, typically relative pronoun modifiers modify the closest noun. However, they can also modify slightly far away noun when this noun is the head of the noun phrase and when such modification makes sense.
E-GMAT customers can find detailed description of this concept in the concept file – Modifiers – Relative Pronouns. Also, I cover this topic in excruciating detail in one of the live sessions in the Verbal Live Complete.
This choice is absolutely correct. There are no grammatical and meaning based errors in this sentence.
Grammatically Correct but Incorrect choice (E)– – Notice how in choice E the test makers have changed the modifier from “that clause” to “who clause”. See, “who” modifiers cannot modify things. They can only modify people. So by changing ‘thing’ modifying modifier to ‘person’ modifying modifier, now automatically the entity being modified changes to “individual”. Now the modifier no longer modifies “emotional reactions”. This changes the meaning. This results in different yet still logical meaning.
The intended meaning communicated by Choice E is the following:
1. Use of lie detectors is based on a certain assumption. Here is the assumption:
2. Lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
3. The individual then creates unconscious physiological responses.
Note that without subject matter knowledge, the above cause and effect sequence appears to be logical. Lying produces certain reactions in the individual and then the individual unknowingly creates certain type of responses.
Thus, the meaning communicated by this choice is certainly different from the meaning communicated by choice A. Hence, while choice E is grammatically correct, it changes the logical intended meaning and is not the correct choice.
OFFICIAL QUESTION 2 – OG Verbal Review 2 - Q#108Now let’s take another official question.
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.
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
Intended meaning from Choice A: The sentence is written in an awkward manner but we can certainly infer the intended meaning.
1. Sound can travel through water for long distances.
2. The acoustic energy of sound is prevented from dissipating because of the boundaries in the ocean. These boundaries are created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.
Now it is logical to say that because of statement 2, statement 1 happens. That is because the acoustic energy of sound is not dissipated easily, sound can travel through water for long distances. At this point you can picture in your mind that these two facts can be connected in multiple ways:
1. Use connectors that state reason such as because, since.
2. Use modifier that extends the thought of preceding clause.
Error in the original choice: Choice A is not the correct choice since it is not written properly.
Choice C corrects this error and is the correct choice. It uses noun + noun modifier construction to explain how sound can travel through water for long distances. Notice that a noun + noun modifier construction is very versatile. It can modify any aspect of the preceding clause. It need not be necessarily connected to the subject of the clause. This is what sets it apart from a verb-ing modifier which has been used in choice E.
Grammatically Correct but Incorrect choice E: Notice how the test makers have changed this modifier to verb-ing modifier. As we discussed earlier, a verb-ing modifier when separated by a comma modifies the preceding clause but is connected with the subject of that clause. It may also present the result of the action in the preceding clause. Neither of these modifications in this sentence creates an illogical meaning. Two possible interpretations are:
• Illogical meaning 1
Sound can travel through water for long distances.
Sound prevents its energy from dissipating because of the boundaries in the ocean. These boundaries are created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.
This is illogical since sound itself does not prevent its energy from being dissipated. The boundaries in the ocean prevent the energy of sound from being dissipated.
• Illogical meaning 2
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances
This leads to its energy being prevented from dissipation
So as you can see, by changing the modifier, the context of the sentence changes, resulting in this case in an illogical meaning. Now at first look this choice may appear to be correct since grammatically there are no errors. However, since the correct choice must communicated intended logical meaning, this choice is not the correct answer.
HOW TO EVALUATE CHOICES THAT CHANGE THE MEANING?1. Understand the logical meaning of the original choice.
a. Note how the modifiers have been used.
b. If the meaning is not clear in the original choice, then apply your knowledge of modifiers and determine the suitable modifier for the sentence. Such pre-thinking helps when you review the answer choices.
2. Look for the answer choice that best communicates the same meaning in un-ambiguous and grammatically correct manner.
3. Ignore choices that may be grammatically correct but change the meaning. A seemingly correct grammatical choice may also communicate an illogical meaning.
PRACTICE PROBLEMSe-GMAT course has 33 practice problems.
e-GMAT customers can see the list by clicking the link below.
https://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=745We have also posted 2 new problems at the links below. Try them out.
What is "having won over by" modifier modifying here - "The Classical guitar" or "Andres Segovia"?
) on Noun+Noun modifier, it is mentioned that "verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma can only modify preceding clause".
Then, how can "having been won over..." modifier modifying "Classical guitar"- according to this explanation.
- Moreover, "having been won over..." incorrectly modifies "classical guitar" (the subject of the preceding clause) instead of Segovia."
I am confused what verb-ing modifier modify here. Please help
- In this example, all 3 verb-ing modifiers are modifying one of the actions ["(have) monitored"] of the preceding clause and NOT the whole preceding clause.
close
Updated on: 04 Mar 2013, 11:44
