Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 30 May 2016, 08:07

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2013, 17:55
is the answer for the second question a. as it is right.
Intern
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 13
GMAT 1: 0 Q0 V0
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 9

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2013, 08:12
Great post by E-Gmat.

I have got confused after reading this post. Here is why.

a) (GMAT Prep question) Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline.

(A) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang
(B) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs were hanging
(C) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(D) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(E) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung

OA-D
GMAT Prep explanation for 'E'- whose illogically refers to branches.
1) If we ignore the tense error in 'E', is it still an incorrect choice based on noun modified by 'whose'? Can't 'whose' refer to 'monkeys' as 'sleeping on the branches modifies 'monkeys'?
2) How 'with arms and legs...' in 'D' refers to the action 'sleeping' and not 'branches'? As per my knowledge, there is no rule for 'COMMA+Prep phrase'. 'with arms and legs..' can grammatically refer to 'branches'. Prep phrases play role of an adverbial modifier or adjectival modifier. I am confused. According to me, if we ignore tense error for E, then 'E" and 'D' both have logical modifiers. (** I am not questioning correctness of OG answers but trying to understand the concept)

b) (OG 12th edition) The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

(A) The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(B) To the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote two letters, being the only eyewitness accounts of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(C) The only eyewitness account is in two letters by the nephew of Pliny the Elder writing to the historian Tacitus an account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.
(D) Writing the only eyewitness account, Pliny the Elder’s nephew accounted for the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.
(E) In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius

OA: E

OG explanation for 'A'- 'in two letters to the historian Tacitus' illogically refers to eruption.
How can it be? When we know that it is illogical for 'in letters' to refer to 'eruption'. Prep phrase can also modify verb. Then why can prep phrase in 'A', modify 'wrote'??

Can you please explain how prepositional modifiers function-when they are at end of sentence, at start of the sentence, with comma, without comma?
Any help is deeply appreciated.

Regards,
Heman2727
_________________

If my post helps, please do appreciate it with a Kudos!!
Cheers to great learning. Knowledge increases by sharing and not by saving!!!!

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 335
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 136

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2013, 01:18
egmat wrote:

3: Like the great navigators who first sailed around the Earth gathering information about its size and the curvature of its surface, astronomers have made new observations that show with startling directness the large-scale geometry of the universe. (Choice D)

After reading this one, almost all of you will say that “gathering” is a verb-ing modifier that is placed after “Earth” and is not preceded by a comma. Hence, it must modify “Earth”. This modification makes no sense because Earth dis not gather information. The great navigators did. This sentence is incorrect. BUT IN REALITY, this sentence is absolutely correct. Here is why.

Structurally, “who first sailed around the Earth” is a clause. Here “who” stands for “the great navigators”. Now together “the great navigators who first sailed around the Earth” is a big noun phrase (refer to the mini article on noun phrases and Noun modifiers).

Many of you may argue that this entity contains a “who clause”. How can we classify as a noun phrase. We can classify this as a noun phrase since it has a noun at its head. It is of the construction – Noun + Clause.

The head of this big noun phrase is “the great investigators”. Now the “who” clause that modifies “the great investigators” cannot be placed anywhere else in the sentence. This gives “gathering”, a noun modifier, the liberty to jump over the preceding modifier and modify the head – “the great investigators”. Hence, “gathering” in this sentence is correctly modifying “the great investigators”.

Futhermore, logically “earth” cannot gather information.

Hi eGMAT/Experts,

I would like to build my understanding more on the above Red colored part.

Example 1
When we say that the earth cannot gather information, it means that it is illogical and hence we should move further to see if we have any other noun that could have been modified by the entity "gathering information.....". By doing so, we found the noun - great navigators and hence the phrase "gathering..." must be modifying "great navigators"

Now, taking the same concept forward to the below example--

Example 2
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus

As the above poster correctly mentions that the eruption of Vesuvius cannot happen in the two letters, hence the modification is illogical and we should move further to see if there is any valid verb/noun to whom it can modify. Here, "Wrote" is the verb that is getting modified correctly by the phrase - in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

Question is - Why we are saying that choice 2 is illogical, however going by the same framework and logic makes the first example correct. Please respond.

Thanks
H
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Current Student
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 58
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Sustainability
Schools: Fisher '16 (M)
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 6

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2013, 23:37
egmat wrote:
Hi Simba2012,
I'm glad that you liked the article. But what makes me really happy that now you understand in which scenario "which" can modify a slightly far away noun.
Let me also congratulate for solving the execise correctly. Great job there.

You can also check out a foundation concept on Noun phrases and Noun modifiers.

noun-modifiers-can-modify-slightly-far-away-noun-prequel-135910.html#p1105284

Thanks.

Can you please confirm if my understanding is right on Sunspots question in OG 13.
Sunspots,vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear as dark spots on the suns surface, which have never been sighted on the suns poles or equators.

can we say that which here points to dark spots ? because on the suns surface is a noun modifier ?
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 335
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 136

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2013, 00:12
vigneshceg wrote:
Can you please confirm if my understanding is right on Sunspots question in OG 13.
Sunspots,vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear as dark spots on the suns surface, which have never been sighted on the suns poles or equators.

can we say that which here points to dark spots ? because on the suns surface is a noun modifier ?

Hi Vigneshceg,

Your understanding is correct. You can do a double check with the verb present in the Relative Clause. The Verb is Plural, so it must refer to plural noun. Hence, Dark spots. More often than not(90% cases), you have the helping verb that will clarify the noun that the relative pronoun is referring to. I have given an analysis in this thread only, you may take a look on it.

Thanks
H
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Current Student
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 58
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Sustainability
Schools: Fisher '16 (M)
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 6

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2013, 02:01
imhimanshu wrote:
vigneshceg wrote:
Can you please confirm if my understanding is right on Sunspots question in OG 13.
Sunspots,vortices of gas associated with strong electromagnetic activity, appear as dark spots on the suns surface, which have never been sighted on the suns poles or equators.

can we say that which here points to dark spots ? because on the sun`s surface is a noun modifier ?

Hi Vigneshceg,

Your understanding is correct. You can do a double check with the verb present in the Relative Clause. The Verb is Plural, so it must refer to plural noun. Hence, Dark spots. More often than not(90% cases), you have the helping verb that will clarify the noun that the relative pronoun is referring to. I have given an analysis in this thread only, you may take a look on it.

Thanks
H

Thanks for the reply H.
I saw your previous posts and was informative.
To be honest, I am confused. I thought in the blah blah modified the verb wrote.
We must have more clarity and direction on the thought.
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 335
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 136

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2013, 02:56
vigneshceg wrote:

Thanks for the reply H.
I saw your previous posts and was informative.
To be honest, I am confused. I thought in the blah blah modified the verb wrote.
We must have more clarity and direction on the thought.

Please refer to the one written on "Feb 25, 2013 8:38 am". I think, you have seen the post written yesterday by me, that is a doubt posted by me not a learning...
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Intern
Joined: 27 Jan 2011
Posts: 21
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 27

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 14:11
The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt in the coming months, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

It is said that the above sentence is incorrect because modifier "in the coming months" modifies "help to banks" and not "sovereign debt". I agree to this but,
I also read a "comma which rule" that states the below. Applying this rule it is clear that WHICH is modifying the nearest singular noun "sovereign debt". Please help me understand what is it that I am missing here??

Regarding the use of COMMA + which on the GMAT:
If which has a SINGULAR verb, then it should refer to the nearest preceding SINGULAR noun.
If which has a PLURAL verb, then it should refer to the nearest preceding PLURAL noun.

Cheers,
Raghu.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1944
Followers: 1843

Kudos [?]: 5950 [0], given: 246

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2013, 11:03
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi Heman2727,

The first thing we should keep in mind is that the rule discussed in this article pertains ONLY to Noun Modifiers.

Another thing I would like to bring to your attention is the nature of prepositional phrases. They can modify Nouns as well as Verb. So we must be very careful to ascertain what it should logically modify and then make sure that its placement is correct.

If you study the GMAT sentence that you have provided, the prepositional phrase “on the branches” modifies the action denoted by “sleeping”. Where do monkeys sleep? On the branches. So this prepositional phrase is not part of “monkeys”. This is the reason why, all the relative pronouns after “branches” refer to “branches”. The relative pronoun cannot jump over those prepositional phrases that do not modify the same noun entity as the relative pronoun modifier modifies.

Study these official examples:
1. Although she had been known as an effective legislator first in the Texas Senate and later in the United States House of Representatives, Barbara Jordan did not become a nationally recognized figure until 1974, when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were televised nationwide.

2. Emily Dickinson’s letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber her letters to anyone else.

This is the reason why choice D is the correct answer here because “with arms and legs hanging” can logically only refer to monkeys.

Now let’s come to your next question.
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

In this sentence, we must first ascertain what “in two letters” is supposed to modify. It should modify “wrote the only eyewitness account”. Since prepositional phrases can refer to nouns also, incorrect placements make the modification ambiguous. Here, “wrote” is separated by “in two letter” by so many noun entities. This makes it appropriate to place this prepositional phrase closer to the entity it is supposed to modify to avoid any room for ambiguous.

So the original sentence still leaves a little room for ambiguous, but not the correct answer where “in two letters” has been placed in the beginning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

Aiming to score 760+ on the GMAT? Attend our free webinars to learn how to:

[*] Master Number Properties
[*] Ace Critical Reasoning

The webinars will start at 7 AM PST on the 11th and 12th of July, 2015.

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1944
Followers: 1843

Kudos [?]: 5950 [0], given: 246

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2013, 11:10
Expert's post
imhimanshu wrote:
egmat wrote:

3: Like the great navigators who first sailed around the Earth gathering information about its size and the curvature of its surface, astronomers have made new observations that show with startling directness the large-scale geometry of the universe. (Choice D)

After reading this one, almost all of you will say that “gathering” is a verb-ing modifier that is placed after “Earth” and is not preceded by a comma. Hence, it must modify “Earth”. This modification makes no sense because Earth dis not gather information. The great navigators did. This sentence is incorrect. BUT IN REALITY, this sentence is absolutely correct. Here is why.

Structurally, “who first sailed around the Earth” is a clause. Here “who” stands for “the great navigators”. Now together “the great navigators who first sailed around the Earth” is a big noun phrase (refer to the mini article on noun phrases and Noun modifiers).

Many of you may argue that this entity contains a “who clause”. How can we classify as a noun phrase. We can classify this as a noun phrase since it has a noun at its head. It is of the construction – Noun + Clause.

The head of this big noun phrase is “the great investigators”. Now the “who” clause that modifies “the great investigators” cannot be placed anywhere else in the sentence. This gives “gathering”, a noun modifier, the liberty to jump over the preceding modifier and modify the head – “the great investigators”. Hence, “gathering” in this sentence is correctly modifying “the great investigators”.

Futhermore, logically “earth” cannot gather information.

Hi eGMAT/Experts,

I would like to build my understanding more on the above Red colored part.

Example 1
When we say that the earth cannot gather information, it means that it is illogical and hence we should move further to see if we have any other noun that could have been modified by the entity "gathering information.....". By doing so, we found the noun - great navigators and hence the phrase "gathering..." must be modifying "great navigators"

Now, taking the same concept forward to the below example--

Example 2
The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus

As the above poster correctly mentions that the eruption of Vesuvius cannot happen in the two letters, hence the modification is illogical and we should move further to see if there is any valid verb/noun to whom it can modify. Here, "Wrote" is the verb that is getting modified correctly by the phrase - in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

Question is - Why we are saying that choice 2 is illogical, however going by the same framework and logic makes the first example correct. Please respond.

Thanks
H

Hi Himanshu,

If you read my explanation to Heman2727 on the OG 12 question, you should get your answer. As far as the GMAT Prep question of "gathering..." is concerned, it is really an uncommon question where we go by the logic and kind of overlook the grammar. However, this is not a common practice.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

Aiming to score 760+ on the GMAT? Attend our free webinars to learn how to:

[*] Master Number Properties
[*] Ace Critical Reasoning

The webinars will start at 7 AM PST on the 11th and 12th of July, 2015.

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1944
Followers: 1843

Kudos [?]: 5950 [0], given: 246

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2013, 11:57
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
pkonduri wrote:
The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt in the coming months, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

Hi Raghu,

Noun Modifiers, in this case the relative pronoun "which", can only jump over prepositional phrases preceding them when those prepositional phrases modify the same entity as the noun modifier after the prepositional phrase does. If the preceding prepositional phrase modifies any other entity, then the noun modifier cannot jump over that prepositional. In that case it will modify the immediate preceding noun.

This is what is happening in the sentence that you have provided. "in the coming months" refers to the verb "would provide". This prepositional phrase is not part of "sovereign debts". So, "which" cannot jump over "in the coming months" and modify "sovereign debts".

Now the rules that you have cited also stand correct. But that rule applies to those sentence where the modification is correct. In the above sentence, the modification at the first is incorrect. So there is no question of application of those rules here.

Let's study a set of correct example sentences to see the application of these rules:

1. The box of nails that is made up of wood is in the shelf.
2. The box of nails that are rusted is is in the shelf.

In sentence 1, since the verb "is" after "that" is singular, "that" refers to "box" even if it is preceded by another noun entity "nails". The noun modifier "that" can jump over "of nails" because "of nails" also refers to the "the box." In sentence 2, the verb after "that" is "are", a plural verb. Hence, it needs a plural subject. So that refers to the immediate preceding plural noun "nails".

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

Aiming to score 760+ on the GMAT? Attend our free webinars to learn how to:

[*] Master Number Properties
[*] Ace Critical Reasoning

The webinars will start at 7 AM PST on the 11th and 12th of July, 2015.

Intern
Joined: 27 Jan 2011
Posts: 21
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 27

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2013, 22:58
Little late to reply, but thank you for your time. I understand the rule now.

egmat wrote:
pkonduri wrote:
The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt in the coming months, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

Hi Raghu,

Noun Modifiers, in this case the relative pronoun "which", can only jump over prepositional phrases preceding them when those prepositional phrases modify the same entity as the noun modifier after the prepositional phrase does. If the preceding prepositional phrase modifies any other entity, then the noun modifier cannot jump over that prepositional. In that case it will modify the immediate preceding noun.

This is what is happening in the sentence that you have provided. "in the coming months" refers to the verb "would provide". This prepositional phrase is not part of "sovereign debts". So, "which" cannot jump over "in the coming months" and modify "sovereign debts".

Now the rules that you have cited also stand correct. But that rule applies to those sentence where the modification is correct. In the above sentence, the modification at the first is incorrect. So there is no question of application of those rules here.

Let's study a set of correct example sentences to see the application of these rules:

1. The box of nails that is made up of wood is in the shelf.
2. The box of nails that are rusted is is in the shelf.

In sentence 1, since the verb "is" after "that" is singular, "that" refers to "box" even if it is preceded by another noun entity "nails". The noun modifier "that" can jump over "of nails" because "of nails" also refers to the "the box." In sentence 2, the verb after "that" is "are", a plural verb. Hence, it needs a plural subject. So that refers to the immediate preceding plural noun "nails".

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Intern
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 5
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2013, 09:14
Firstly,I would like to thank you for the article shared.I have another doubt with the question where signifcance of which is specified.

Letters are not the doer of the verb-ing 'outnumbering'

Is this another reason for the original sentence being wrong.

Also please answer to the below question.

John,a resident of Lake City and an employee of The Bell Company,is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for making international calls.

A)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

B)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,leading to a lowering of rates for

C)which is currently working on a new project to revolutionize the telecommunication industry and also lead to a lower rates for

D)who is currently working on a new project in the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

E)has been currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry as well as lower the rates for.
Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2013
Posts: 9
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 4

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 13:54
Amazing article Shraddha. I cannot believe how you could simplify this matter so well. It definitely did clear up the doubts that I had. I have read many articles on this topic but none provides the article as this one does.

I must also thank the community for posting their doubts about official questions. You know apart from the questions in the article, I could apply the fundas to these official questions. This is simply great!!

Do you have one place where you have all your articles. I think these are articles worthy of bookmarking for any GMAT aspirant!

Thanks once again. Really heart felt thanks...
Manager
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 86
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 99

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jul 2013, 10:36
Simba2012 wrote:
Excellent article!

1) The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt of countries, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

In this sentence "which" is referring to sovereign debt and even though there is prepositional phrase " of countries" between which and the noun- sovereign debt, the sentence is correct because " of countries" is correctly modifying the noun sovereign debt.

2)The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt in the coming months, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

In this sentence "which" is referring to sovereign debt as well, however the prepositional phrase -"in the coming months" that is between "which" and the noun- sovereign debt is not modifying the noun but instead modifying "provide help"

Simba2012 plz check
pkonduri wrote:
The decision of the European leaders to use the Continent’s bailout funds to recapitalize struggling banks would provide help to banks without directly adding to the sovereign debt in the coming months, which has been a problem for Spain and potentially for Italy.

Hi Raghu,

Noun Modifiers, in this case the relative pronoun "which", can only jump over prepositional phrases preceding them when those prepositional phrases modify the same entity as the noun modifier after the prepositional phrase does. If the preceding prepositional phrase modifies any other entity, then the noun modifier cannot jump over that prepositional. In that case it will modify the immediate preceding noun.

This is what is happening in the sentence that you have provided. "in the coming months" refers to the verb "would provide". This prepositional phrase is not part of "sovereign debts". So, "which" cannot jump over "in the coming months" and modify "sovereign debts".

Now the rules that you have cited also stand correct. But that rule applies to those sentence where the modification is correct. In the above sentence, the modification at the first is incorrect. So there is no question of application of those rules here.

Let's study a set of correct example sentences to see the application of these rules:

1. The box of nails that is made up of wood is in the shelf.
2. The box of nails that are rusted is is in the shelf.

In sentence 1, since the verb "is" after "that" is singular, "that" refers to "box" even if it is preceded by another noun entity "nails". The noun modifier "that" can jump over "of nails" because "of nails" also refers to the "the box." In sentence 2, the verb after "that" is "are", a plural verb. Hence, it needs a plural subject. So that refers to the immediate preceding plural noun "nails".

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1944
Followers: 1843

Kudos [?]: 5950 [0], given: 246

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 07:10
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
shirish87 wrote:
Firstly,I would like to thank you for the article shared.I have another doubt with the question where signifcance of which is specified.

Letters are not the doer of the verb-ing 'outnumbering'

Is this another reason for the original sentence being wrong.

Also please answer to the below question.

John,a resident of Lake City and an employee of The Bell Company,is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for making international calls.

A)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

B)is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry,leading to a lowering of rates for

C)which is currently working on a new project to revolutionize the telecommunication industry and also lead to a lower rates for

D)who is currently working on a new project in the telecommunication industry,which will lead to a lowering of rates for

E)has been currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry as well as lower the rates for.

Hi Sirish,

Comma + verb-ing modifiers present either the HOW aspect of the preceding action or the result. The reason why “outnumbering” is not correct is that Emily did not wrote the letters to SHD by outnumbering” her letters. Also, “outnumbering” is not the effect of Emily’s writing to SHD. Hence, use of “outnumbering” is not correct.

Now let’s look at the sentence that you have presented:

John, a resident of Lake City and an employee of The Bell Company, is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for making international calls.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

John is working on a project. This project will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. This industry will lead to decrease in rates for international calls. But it does not make sense to say that the industry will lead to decrease in the rates for international calls.

ERROR ANALYSIS:

From our meaning analysis, we know that it does not make sense to say that the industry will lead to decrease in the rates for international calls. Hence, use of “which” is incorrect in this sentence.

PoE:

A) is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for: Incorrect for the reason stated above.

B) is currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry, leading to a lowering of rates for: Correct. Comma + Verb-ing modifiers correctly presents how the new project will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. It will do so by lowering the rates for international calls.

C) which is currently working on a new project to revolutionize the telecommunication industry and also lead to a lower rates for: Incorrect.
1. “which” illogically refers to “The Bell Company”.
2. Absence of verb for the subject “John” leads to fragment error.

D) who is currently working on a new project in the telecommunication industry, which will lead to a lowering of rates for: Incorrect. Same “which” modification error as in choice A and fragment error as in choice C.

E) has been currently working on a new project that will revolutionize the telecommunication industry as well as lower the rates for: Incorrect.
1. Use of present perfect tense is incorrect.
2. The new project will do just one thing. It will revolutionize the telecommunication industry. The forced parallel list changes the meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

Aiming to score 760+ on the GMAT? Attend our free webinars to learn how to:

[*] Master Number Properties
[*] Ace Critical Reasoning

The webinars will start at 7 AM PST on the 11th and 12th of July, 2015.

Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2013
Posts: 70
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 14

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 10:32

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

Can you please explain the usage of modifiers in this question

Regards,
Veenu
Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2013
Posts: 70
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 14

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2013, 11:37
egmat wrote:
Hi Veenu,

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

This one is very interesting. The key to solve this one is to understand the intended logical meaning of the sentence. So let’s do that.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

Economic recession can result from falling employment rates. By the way, the employment rates
fall is triggered by a drop in investment. Coming back to what we were talking about, the falling investment rates cause cuts in consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

Now that we understand the meaning of the question, I would like you to take a stab at this question. Analyze yourself the role of various modifiers in each answer choice and find the correct answer. Post your analysis here so that I can understand your analysis.

So all the very best.

Looking forward to your analysis.
Thanks.

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.--causes vs starts, and usage of people and consumer together leading to redundancy.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.-- which is modifying falling employment rates, but cutbacks in consumer spending and layoffs are parallel activities.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.-- here verb-ing form is the result of the preceding clause-- correct answer

Kindly review it

Regards,
Veenu
BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 1187
Followers: 116

Kudos [?]: 1158 [0], given: 141

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2013, 13:06
Expert's post
egmat wrote:
Hi Veenu,

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

This one is very interesting. The key to solve this one is to understand the intended logical meaning of the sentence. So let’s do that.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

Economic recession can result from falling employment rates. By the way, the employment rates
fall is triggered by a drop in investment. Coming back to what we were talking about, the falling investment rates cause cuts in consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

Now that we understand the meaning of the question, I would like you to take a stab at this question. Analyze yourself the role of various modifiers in each answer choice and find the correct answer. Post your analysis here so that I can understand your analysis.

So all the very best.

Looking forward to your analysis.
Thanks.

Shraddha- I'd go with E (although I haven't seen your analysis )...
_________________
Current Student
Status: Applications.
Affiliations: None
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 18
Concentration: General Management, Technology
Schools: Cox '17 (A)
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GMAT 2: 720 Q48 V41
GPA: 4
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 90

Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2013, 09:32
egmat wrote:
Hi Veenu,

An economic recession can result from a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(a) a lowering of employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(b) a lowering of employment rates triggered by dropping investment, which causes people to cut consumer spending and starts a cycle of layoffs leading back to even lower employment rates.

(c) falling employment rates triggered by a drop in investment, which cause cutbacks in consumer spending, starting a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

(d) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing people to cut consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs that lead back to even lower employment rates.

(e) falling employment rates that are triggered by a drop in investment, causing cutbacks in consumer spending and starting a cycle of layoffs leading to even lower employment rates.

This one is very interesting. The key to solve this one is to understand the intended logical meaning of the sentence. So let’s do that.

MEANING ANALYSIS:

Economic recession can result from falling employment rates. By the way, the employment rates
fall is triggered by a drop in investment. Coming back to what we were talking about, the falling investment rates cause cuts in consumer spending and start a cycle of layoffs that lead to even lower employment rates.

Now that we understand the meaning of the question, I would like you to take a stab at this question. Analyze yourself the role of various modifiers in each answer choice and find the correct answer. Post your analysis here so that I can understand your analysis.

So all the very best.

Looking forward to your analysis.
Thanks.

E looks good.

I am not sure If I am right in saying this but to me it sounds as if the phrase " lowering of unemployment rate " would cause something like a cutback in spending.

I don't think it is right to say it causes people to cut spending.

A better option would be it forces people to cut the spending.

Based on this I eliminated A , B ,and C.

Of course i can be wrong. :D

Could you please review my analysis.

And thanks for the original article. It is pretty good.

Thanks again,
Sandeep.
Re: Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun   [#permalink] 23 Aug 2013, 09:32

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 94 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
can modifier ',if used continuously' modify the noun that is far away. 0 08 Feb 2015, 02:04
95 NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 27 20 Aug 2012, 15:09
44 A Primer on Noun phrases and Noun modifiers 11 17 Jul 2012, 14:45
Noun modifiers vs Verb Modifier 5 24 Mar 2011, 20:23
Which noun does this modifier modify? 3 07 Sep 2010, 12:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Noun Modifiers can Modify slightly far away noun

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.