The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an

The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May, which renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.

a. which renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
b. an event that renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
c. and renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
d. renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
e. renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.

Can you please explain how E can be correct?
You can't say
The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May, renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
because it won't be correct to swap the phrases and say
Renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States, the fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May

I thought if you use a comma + "ing", you should be able to swap the sentences and they should still make sense.

Wouldn't the correct answer be The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
- without the comma before renewing????

Thanks

Hii
The meaning of {clause + ",", "verbing"} is different from {clause + "verbing"}. In the former case, the verbing modifier modifies the entire clause whereas in the latter case the verbing modifier modifies just the last word of the preceding clause.
Hope that helps.

No; removing the comma before renewing will not work out since, when verb+ing participle is not preceded by a comma, the it will directly refer to the word that is just before namely May or sales of May at the most. Without the comma, the participle loses its power to modify the entire preceding clause, thus distorting the original meaning.
The take away is: an ing participle, with comma modifies the entire preceding clause and without comma modifies just the preceding word.

can someone explain me whats the problem in B...I feel the noun +noun modifier modifies either the preceding noun or cluase ..here it modifies the clause..So on what basis option B is an incorrect answer?

hi,
In option B noun +noun modifier always just add an additional information abt the precedding noun or clause.But as per the intended meaning of the sentence
The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May" this resulted in the "renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United State"
So its logical to use renewing(verb+ing modifer) when the intended meaning of sentence is the result of preceding clause
hope this helps

@friend29

First, we need to know what renews the concern? The fragile market or the drop in sales. The drop in sales is only the fact that demonstrates the market is fragile. The fragile market is key, because the drop in sales can happen for reasons other than the fragile market. (for example, there would be a big promotion in June that makes sales in May drop). The intended meaning is that the fragile market renews the concerns. In addition, "an event" is appositive modifier that modifies the noun phrase before it (a drop in sales), thus changes the meaning.

Hope it helps.

It`s a modifier problem.Answer is E.according to ing modifier describes the clause or shows the effect of the clause.here the modifier describes the clause.

Marcab,

This is the answer from the question Bank, from where I actually posted this question,

Solution:
This problem tests your ability to distinguish between different types of modifiers. The underlined portion in the original stimulus is a relative clause because it begins with the relative pronoun “which.” A relative clause modifier must be immediately adjacent to the noun it modifies. Because it doesn’t make sense to modify “May,” answer (A) is incorrect.


Option (B) is an appositive modifier, but again, there is no noun it is renaming, so this construction is also incorrect.

Choice (C) applies the main subject “fragile markets” to the verb “renewed,” implying that the fragile markets themselves renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery. This changes the meaning of the sentence and therefore should be eliminated.

Answer (D) eliminates the subject attached to the verb “renewed” and therefore renders the sentence incoherent.


Option (E) correctly uses a participial modifier (“renewing concerns…”) at the end of the sentence to show that it modifies the action of the entire previous clause. Only a participial modifier (using a verb that typically ends in –ing or –ed) can function in this position.


Still I can't understand the explanations- B,C,D and E.

Hi trafficspinners , lets see if I can help you here

The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May, which renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.

C. and renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
C is not correct beacuse the structure of the sentence would look like:
"The fragile markets were caught" "and renewed concerns". This is a logic error as the subject for the second verb is not "the markets" but the "drop".

D has a similar problem: the structure is very unclear. But now we arrive at the real deal: B vs E

E is wrong because it does not use the "COMMA + ING" modifier correctly. It is true that this form of modifer shows the consequences of the preceding clause, it adds info,... BUT it must make sense with the subject of the preceding clause as well.

The fragile markets were caught off-guard Friday by an unexpected drop in retail sales for May, renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States . It seems that the markets renewed the concern => wrong becasue the drop did that, not the markets. If you wanna know more about this topic refer here: usage-of-verb-ing-modifiers-135220.html#p1101074

I am not sure of the explanation given for point B "there is no noun it is renaming??". This is an official question that has a similar structure: in-1713-alexander-pope-began-his-translation-of-the-illiad-65410.html. "a work" refer to "the translation" in that question.
With this said if I have to pick an answer I would choose B. I do not think it is ambiguos as "an event" (just like in the official question) refers to the fact that "markets were caught off-guard by a drop".

This question has a more than debatable OA, I would suggest you to practice on official questions as much as you can.

Hope this helps

May be someone from the eGMAT can throw some light on this question. Option B would be a perfect case for Noun Modifier explanation as mentioned in Section 3 in this link https://gmatclub.com/forum/noun-noun-modifiers-the-most-versatile-modifier-137292.html

Correct Ans me be B

Reason : As the underlined sentence must modify drop in retail sales ....not the fragile markets , Because in case of Clause, Verb-ing modifies although it modify the clause but it does so by modifying subject of clause,.

In this case, fragile market is not renewing concern...its drop in retail sales

Share with me your thoughts if i am wrong somewhere

Regards
LS

I would like to correct myself ...ans must be E.

Reason B is wrong : An event --> noun + noun modifier , In this question the problem is what is the event i.e. the markets caught off gurad or drop in retail sales,
Since there is ambiguity as both can be the called as event, Hence got Out

I can´t. Even I found this explanation that allows B to be correct.

From MGMAT: https://www.manhattangmat.com/articles/ ... itives.cfm

It is also possible for an appositive to modify an entire preceding noun phrase, rather than only the specific noun that it touches directly. For example, this excerpt from Sentence Correction problem number 113 from The Official Guide for Verbal Review 2nd Edition (VR2, p. 267) shows the problematic placement of a prepositional phrase modifier (not an appositive):

“In A.D. 391, resulting from the destruction of the largest library of the ancient world at Alexandria, …”
According to the explanation for this problem, found on page 322 of VR2:

“The largest library of the ancient world at Alexandria is both cumbersome and ambiguous because it suggests that the ancient world was located at (and only at) Alexandria.”
In other words, this noun modifier in the form of the prepositional phrase “at Alexandria” refers only to the noun “world,” immediately preceding the modifier. The correct answer, found on page 267 of VR2, rephrases this part of the sentence:

“In A.D. 391, as a result of the destruction of the library at Alexandria, the largest of the ancient world, …”
The noun modifier “the largest of the ancient world” is now in the form of an appositive. Logically, of course, it should refer to the noun “library,” but that noun is not the noun immediately preceding the appositive. Rather, the noun “Alexandria” immediately precedes the appositive. The VR2 explanation for this problem goes on to say that this placement is acceptable:

“This problem is best corrected by breaking the series of phrases into two distinct parts: the library at Alexandria, the largest of the ancient world. Here, the second phrase clearly modifies the first.”
In other words, the second phrase, the appositive, is allowed to modify the entire first phrase. It does not have to modify only the immediately preceding noun.

I have read other users comments in a few places. But the way I understand Verb+ing modifiers at the end of a sentence should either provide the result or additional information. Such modifiers modify the preceding clause and refer back to the subject. So here Option E, they refer back to the unexpected drop. But because its a passive constructions it seems ambiguous. Can some one explain if such types of constructions are ok. This questions reminds me of the "Emil dickinson letter" question from OG>

Also with B, the appositive I think does refer to the dropping of retail sales, but I can see how that can be ambiguous.

I think there is certain level of ambiguity here. I just want to know if the correct answer is the best correct answer to the question or is it lesser of the two evils.
I would greatly appreciate any response from experts.
TY

I still need to know more why B is wrong. there is a similar question in gmatprep.

why b is wrong?
the pattern
main clause+ a+noun+noun modifier

present which meaning relation?

if I change B to

an event everybody know

then B is correct

is that right?

pls, explain

Hi,
lets see the choices..

A. which renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
which does not have a proper antecedents

B. an event that renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
close but an event modifies the market being caught off guard, which is not the meaning

C. and renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
and' creates problem by bringing parallelism where there is none

D. renewed concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States.
this has run on sentences problem

E. renewing concerns about the pace of the recovery in the United States
CORRECT... ing participle correctly modifies the preceding clause

ans E
hope it helps

Please explain what is this 'ing' rule ?