In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading

Comma + present participle modifier is used to refer to the complete preceding clause - the modifier describes the result of the preceding clause or explains how the action in the preceding clause is done. Here the present participle "selling nearly...." is required to describe how Argentina became the leading exporter. Thus option D and E are left. IN option D the pronoun "It" does not a valid antecedent. Hence E is the best option among the given.

However in option E, the prepositional phrase "with almost half going.." refers in turn to the present participle modifier "selling..." - such usage is generally considered awkward in GMAT. A better, more GMAT-like construction would be:

In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling to foreign markets nearly 90,000 tons a year, half going to United States.

OR

In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling to foreign markets nearly 90,000 tons a year, half of them going to United States.

OR

In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling to foreign markets nearly 90,000 tons a year, half of which went to United States.

The above three alternatives show the correct usage of three different forms of subgroup modifier (referring to "90,000 tons").

Apologies if we're too late to help you, jainbob, but if we are, hopefully this will be useful for somebody else.

Let's start with choice (B):

Here, "that goes to the United States" modifies the [something]... okay, but what does the half (of something) do? The verb "goes" is locked up in the "that" clause, so there is no main verb for the subject "half". That leaves us with a sentence fragment.

Also, notice the use of the present perfect tense: "...Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey..." The present perfect tense suggests an ongoing action, but "with the sale" seems to refer to sales that were completed in the past. That certainly isn't a smoking gun, but, in light of the other issues, we can eliminate (B).


As in choice (B), "with the sale" isn't ideal. And we also have the pronoun "it" to consider...

If we replace the pronoun "it" with "honey", we get, "... almost half of honey.." Well, half of what is actually going to the United States? Half of honey? Umm... what honey? All of the honey in the world? The sentence refers to honey in general, so it doesn't make sense to say that "half of honey" goes to the United States.

So, again, what is actually going to the United States? Half of "the sale"? That doesn't work either. Some amount of honey is sold TO the United States, but the "sale" isn't the thing that goes to the United States.

The thing that goes to the United States is some quantity of honey: half of the ~90,000 tons that are sold each year to foreign markets. So does the singular pronoun "it" refer to "90,000 tons"? In this context, we would say, "90,000 tons ARE sold each year", not "90,000 tons IS sold each year."

At best, the use of "it" is confusing and unclear. Let's see if we can find a better choice.


(D) avoids the use of "with the sale", which wasn't ideal. Instead, "selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets" tells us exactly how "Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey" and implies that Argentina is still selling 90,000 tons a year (an ongoing action, which is consistent with the preceding use of the present perfect).

However, we run into the same pronoun issue that we saw in choice (C). Let's see if (E) is any better:


Choice (E) eliminates the pronoun issue altogether, so that's huge vote in favor of (E) over (D). Also, as described above, "selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets" is better than "with the sale" (as in choice C). This makes (E) the best choice.
_________________

A. 'half of which' should be followed by a working verb rather than a participial

B. 'that' is redundant. There is no need to make make the last part parallel to the main clause


C. Two with that followe each other are awkward. The structure after second 'with' is what GMAT doesn't like: preposition + noun + participial. 'markets of nearly 90,000 tons a year' changes the intended meaning.

D. it has no logical referent! Again it not necessary to make the main clause and last part parallel, as they are not of the same importance

E. Correct!

'with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets, almost half of which going' is the detail on how Argentina has become the leader.

Sentence is written in the present perfect tense.

A. with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets, almost half of which going. 'Sold' in the past tense doesn't coincide with the tense used in the sentence.

B. with the sale of nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, and almost half of it that goes 'almost half of it' is a fragment

C. with the sale to foreign markets of nearly 90,000 tons a year, with almost half of it going 'with almost half of it going' is not connected with proper conjunction with th previous sentence

D. selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, and almost half of it goes. Argentina has become leader by doing something. -ing is needed rather then simple present 'goes'

E. selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, with almost half going selling and going are parallel.


D is the answer
_________________

Hi Expert,

I have a query in this question from GMAT Prep - Practice Exam 3.

Question

In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets, almost half of which going to the United States.
A. with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets, almost half of which going
B. with the sale of nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, and almost half of it that goes
C. with the sale to foreign markets of nearly 90,000 tons a year, with almost half of it going
D. selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, and almost half of it goes
E. selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, with almost half going

My Analysis

Meaning - Argentina has become the leading exporter by selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets. Half of the honey exported goes to US.

It should be a verb+ing modifier because it tells how Argentina has become leading exporter.

So A,B,C are eliminated.

Option choice D - Sentence Structure - Independent Clause, Modifier and Independent Clause
Meaning of the sentence implies half of the (honey exported) goes to US. So there is no Logical Antecedent for it.
So D is eliminated.

Option choice E is the correct answer.

I had difficulty in understanding the meaning of correct answer choice E.

with almost half going to US. This is a prepositional phrase modifier. What this modifier is modifying?

I face difficulty in solving the problems with sentence Structure as below:
Independent Clause, First Modifier, Second Modifier.

But GMAT loves to load a sentence with modifiers, so I should also start loving it .

I have come across three sentences from official sources with such sentence structure.

1. Source GMAT prep - Practice Exam 3 - First as mentioned above

2. Source GMAT prep - In the past several years, astronomers have detected more than 80 massive planets, most of them at least as large as Jupiter, circling other stars. In this sentence the modifier circling other stars modifies 80 massive planets.

3. Source mba.com - GMAT practice question of the day - Executives and federal officials say that the use of crack and cocaine is growing rapidly among workers, significantly compounding the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, which already cost business more than $100 billion a year. Relative pronoun modifier which already cost business more than $100 billion a year modifies the effects.

Now I tried to understand the role played by Second modifier in all the thee sentences. My understanding is as below:

1. Kindly help me understand what does prepositional phrase modifies?

2. Second modifier modifies the noun in the clause

3. Second modifier modifies the noun in the First modifier

Is there any general rule or method to deal with questions with sentence structure as Independent Clause, First Modifier, Second Modifier. or it is only question specific?


Thanks

Sahil

Sorry for going off topic, but is it OK to use predicates with different verb form for the same subject using AND?
Such as, 'X is doing great and it will continue to do so'. Is this an acceptable sentence at GMAT?

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

But - Half seems to denote the fraction half as opposed to "half of something" - Am I missing something? Or is it the case of of all the sentences, this is the best one - So its a compromised correct answer?

Hello GMATNinja egmat

Can you explain the structure of the sentence in Option E?

It it - Prepositional Phrase, Independent Clause, modifier, modifier

The last modifier that begins with "with" , what is it modifying? Also is it okay when we have two modifiers back to back?

Please help. Thanks
_________________

Hello pikolo2510,

Thank you for the query. I would be glad to help you out with this one.

Let's take a look at the sentence with the correct answer choice E:

In little more than a decade, Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, with almost half going to the United States.


The sentence starts with the prepositional phrase that describes the time frame in which Argentina has become the word's leading exporter of honey. So the opening prepositional phrase modifies the action of the main clause.


Since selling nearly 90,000 tons... is a comma + verb-ing modifier, is modifies the preceding action has become.

Now, the last modifier is again a prepositional phrase modifier that modifies the action denoted by selling.... It further describes that half of the sales goes to the US.

Yes, the usage of back to back modifiers is correct as long as each modifier clearly modifies the entity it is supposed to modify. This official sentence is the classic example of such usage.

All the modifiers clearly modify the entity they are supposed to modify and hence, present the intended meaning with no ambiguity at all.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

Hello TheGMATcracker,

I am not sure if you still have this doubt. Nonetheless, here is the explanation.

We need to pay attention to what the sentence intends to say.

The sentence says that Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets. Now half of this nearly 90,000 tons of honey is sold to the US.

So yes, half has been used to show the fraction of the total sales mentioned in the sentence.


IMHO, options A, B, and C are incorrect for the usage of with modifier in the beginning of each choice as the phrase fails to connect logically with the main action. Usage of this modifier seems to suggest that Argentina has become something along with some other action taking place.


Choice D is incorrect because singular it cannot refer to plural nearly 90,000 tons.

Choice E is the correct answer as it clearly presents the intended meaning.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

Would you help me with these questions?

1) Please correct me if I'm wrong, can 'it' refer to honey in choice D? I discarded D because goes should be has gone, is this reasoning correct?.
2) is going parallel to selling in choice E? Many people have said that, but they are on different modifier phrases, taking different functions and not part of a list, so I can't see how they are parallel.

Kind regards,
Cristián

Hello @Cristián CristianJuarez


Thank you for your post. I will be glad to help you out with this one.

1) Pay very close attention to context of the sentence. The sentence states how Argentina has become the word's leading exporter of honey. In the description, the sentence mentions a specific amount and then says that half goes to the US.

So the sentence presents an instance in relevance of which it mentions the US. So logically, it must refer to 90,000 tons and not just honey.

I am afraid your reason to reject Choice D is not correct. It is a general fact that the US imports almost half of the quantity of the honey exported by Argentina. Hence, use of simple present tense verb goes is correct in Choice D.


2) You are correct in your understanding about the usage of selling and going in Choice E. They are NOT parallel as there is no parallel marker between them. The with modifier is just the extension of the information provided in the comma + selling modifier.



Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

I still cannot understand the different explanations present in the discussion. Would really appreciate if GMATNinja can answer this one.

Dear GMATGuruNY

1- Why is choice A incorrect? doesn't the construction 'with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets' answer the question HOW Argentina became biggest exporter?

2- Is 'almost half of which' wrong?

Thanks

RULE: which must serve as part of a CLAUSE.
A clause includes both a subject and a verb.

RULE: A VERBing may function as a verb only if it is preceded by a helping verb such as is, was, etc.
John IS going.
Mary WAS going.
The children HAVE BEEN going.
A VERBing without a helping verb functions either as a MODIFIER or as a NOUN.

A: Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, with nearly 90,000 tons a year sold to foreign markets, almost half of which going to the United States.
Here, going is not a verb but a MODIFIER describing half of which.
The portion in red does not include a verb and thus does not constitute a clause.
As a result, this usage of which is invalid.
Eliminate A.

Other issues:

A reader might at first construe that which refers to MARKETS, the nearest eligible antecedent.
But semantically, the intended referent seems to be 90,000 TONS.
Since the referent for which is not immediately clear, eliminate A.

The modifier in blue is a bit ambiguous: it does not make crystal clear WHO has sold 90,000 tons to foreign markets.
It could be that 90,000 tons are sold by Argentina ALONE.
It could be that 90,000 tons are sold by all of the world's honey-producing countries COMBINED.
Since both interpretations are possible, we should check whether an alternate answer choice clarifies the intended meaning.

Generally, COMMA + VERBing after a clause serves to express an action attributed to the preceding subject.
E: Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets.
Here, selling unambiguously refers to ARGENTINA -- the preceding subject -- clearly conveying that ARGENTINA is selling 90,000 tons to foreign markets.

Since E conveys a clearer meaning than A, eliminate A.
_________________

In (D), don't you think "it" can only refer back to honey? Which is correct.

D: Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, and almost half of it goes to the United States.
Here, honey refers to HONEY IN GENERAL.
If it refers to honey, the implication is that half of HONEY IN GENERAL goes to the United States.
The intended meaning is that half of the HONEY FROM ARGENTINA goes to the United States.
This meaning is conveyed by the OA:
Argentina has become the world’s leading exporter of honey, selling nearly 90,000 tons a year to foreign markets, with almost half going to the United States.
Here, almost half clearly refers to the nearly 90,000 tons sold by Argentina, correctly conveying that almost half of the honey FROM ARGENTINA goes to the United States.
_________________

DmitryFarber VeritasKarishma Why the use of ", with" in A is incorrect? Also, why the use of ", with" in E is correct? Moreover, what's the difference in usage of both? Thank you!

Will2020 The issue is not really that "with" is wrong in A and required in E. It's simply a matter of overall usage, meaning, and structure. I think we can make a case that the adverbial modifier "selling" more clearly modifies the main action than the passive "with 90,000 tons sold." However, it's hard to say that this part of A is really wrong. A really fails in the second half. Even if we accept that "which" refers to honey and not markets (this isn't great), we simply can't say "half of which going." We have to say "half of which goes" or "with half going."
_________________