Usage of Verb-ing Modifiers - Part 1

Hi drebellion,

Let me first apologize to you for getting back on this after so ling. I don't know if you still have any confusion regarding this question, but let me still post a reply so that others can benefit.

The only difference between choices B and E is that the former says "55% more delay" and the latter says "a 55% increase in delays".

In Choice B, it is really ambiguous what "55% more delay" actually wants to refer to. Increase in delay is not correct because the sentence talks about the increase in the number of delays. So we should say "delays" instead of "delay". Choice E clarifies that ambiguity.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Nitinaka19,

Analysis of Choice A: The sentence tells us that Lucretia Mott published "Discourse on Women". Then we have a Comma + Verb-ing "arguing..." that modifies the preceding action. Now Comma + Verb-ing modifiers perform two functions:

1. presents the "HOW" aspect of the preceding action - In this scenario it does not make sense to say that Mott published "Discourse on Women" by arguing... for women...".
2. presents the "RESULT" of the preceding action - Even this function doe snot make sense because "arguing for women rights" was not the result of publishing "Discourse on Women".

Also, this choice fails to establish that actually "Discourse on Women" is the treatise that Mott published. The phrase "in a treatise" suggests that Mott argued for women rights in some treatise other than "Discourse on Women".

Analysis of Choice E: This choice employs Noun + Noun Modifier that can refer to any entity in the preceding clause. Here, "a treatise" = Noun and "that argued for..." = Noun Modifier. Together this Noun + Noun Modifier modifies "Discourse on Women". It gives more information about this entity. So "Discourse on Women" is a treatise that did something. This Choice CLEARLY communicates the meaning of the sentence. Hence, Choice E is the correct answer.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hello E-GMAT Team,

I have a query regarding the usage of verb-ing modifier and I am using the below OG-13 question to represent it.

A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought.

A. claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as some analysts previously thought
B. claims suggests that the economy might not be so weak as some analysts have previously thought
C. claims suggest that the economy might not be as weak as have been previously thought by some analysts
D. claims, suggesting about the economy that it might not be so weak as previously thought by some analysts
E. claims, suggesting the economy might not be as weak as previously thought to be by some analysts

My doubt is about option D and E. I understand that the verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the previous clause. But considering option D/E, "A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims" is not a clause since is doesn't have a verb and hence the usage of "suggesting" as a verb-ing modifier would be wrong.

But if I change option E to something like this :- A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims give hope to the nation, suggesting the economy might not be as weak as previously thought to be by some analysts.

Would the above be correct as the part before the comma has a verb "give" and so is a clause now?

Also, can we change the position of the verb "give" and make the sentence like this :- A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims, suggesting the economy might not be as weak as previously thought to be by some analysts, give hope to the nation.

I think the non-restrictive clause beginning with the verb-ing modifier can be done away with and the remaining sentence "A surge in new home sales and a drop in weekly unemployment claims give hope to the nation" would still make perfect sense even if the part before the comma doesn't have a verb. I am not sure about this though.

Your inputs will be very helpfull.
Many Thanks.

@e-Gmat - Great article!

However, I am unable to find the Rule #2 article linked on this post.
Can you please do that. It would be of immense help.

Hi egmat

Great Article.

Can you please help me in understanding how this concept can be applied in to-map-earth-s-interior-geologists-use-a-network-of-seismometers-to-206347.html#p1586962

Thanks

egmat
Hi Shraddha,

I read this thread in detail, but I am stuck in grasping the meaning of this particular sentence as explained by you.
'The Farmer Takes Care', He takes care with the intention To Keep Them Cool. How does he take care? - (Additional information) By Providing feed and By Milking them regularly.
I inferred the meaning in above aspect and marked answer choice A.

I couldn't understand why it is illogical. I just went by the word.

I often infer such meaning by interpreting the meaning in above manner.
Is it that Option A is grammatically correct? But the meaning is not proper?
If that is the case, then in difficult Qs, even on Scholaranium I am facing this problem of not grasping the meaning and ticking the option that is grammatically correct, but conveying wrong meaning.

Or, is the Question based on the Serial Comma thing over here? I realised it later.
Still the problem of Meaning persists.

Hi egmat,

I purchased egmat course some timeback; however, it got expired now. Hence I can't ask my doubt on the official site.
I have just one doubt in one concept; please clarify it. I am interpreting something in a wrong way. Please help !

• Joe became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly.

The above sentence is incorrect because "increasing" does not make sense with the subject.

For the below sentence from OG,(https://e-gmat.com/blogs/ogvr-1637/) I read the explanation(for this ques) given on the official page of egmat, but it does not explicitly discuss the problem I am facing


As a result of record low temperatures, the water pipes on the third floor froze, which caused the heads of the sprinkler system to burst, which released torrents of water into offices on the second floor.

the correct answer is -- causing heads of the sprinkler system to burst and release torrents of water

causing +--- should make the sense with water pipes(subject of the previous clause), but it does not make sense to me.

How can water pipe cause the heads of the sprinkler system to burst?

An excerpt from Egmat page on choice D of this ques, but still I don't understand how can water pipe cause the heads of sprinkle system to burst

This choice employs the comma + verb-ing modifiers causing… and …then releasing…. Use of the first comma + verb-ing modifier …causing… is correct because it correctly modifies the action of the preceding clause and also makes sense with the subject of the modified clause the water pipes on the third floor. Per this modification, the water pipes on a certain floor froze, and this action caused the heads of the sprinkler to burst.

Please help!

Hi There,

Thank you for your query. And I apologize for the delay in responding to you.

The problem that you are facing is quite common. Many a times, it does appear to us that the comma + verb-ing modifier does not make sense with the doer of the modified action. The confusion takes place because we try to associate the doer of the modified action with the action denoted by the modifier independently. In a way, we turn the comma + verb-ing modifier in a verb for the doer of the action and apply the SV makes sense rule on the pair. This approach is incorrect.

We must always bear it in our mind that the action denoted by the comma + verb-ing modifier factors in the action that it modifies. While presenting additional information about the action it modifies, the modifier associates with the doer of the modified action.

The question that we should ask while evaluating the correct usage of the comma + verb-ing modifier is who or whose action is responsible for the action denoted by the verb-ing modifier. If the answer is yes, then the sentence uses the comma + verb-ing modifier correctly.

Let’s put this test into action. Let’s first apply this test on the “Joe” sentence. Following is the sentence:
• Joe became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly.
The question we ask:
o Did the action done by Joe increase his pay? No.
Hence, in the above-mentioned sentence, usage of comma + verb-ing modifier is incorrect.

Now let’s apply this test on the official question you have doubt about.
• As a result of record low temperatures, the water pipes on the third floor froze, which caused the heads of the sprinkler system to burst, which released torrents of water into offices on the second floor.
The question we ask:
o Did the action done by the water pipes caused the heads of the sprinklers to burst? Yes.

Hence, in the above-mentioned sentence, usage of comma + verb-ing modifier is correct.

Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Shraddha

1A.Joe became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly.
Here Verb-ing modifier increasing ... significantly correctly presents the result of preceding clause(Joe became the CFO of the company) . I understand that Joe himself did not increase his pay but his action "becoming the CFO" did.

Did the action done by Joe increase his pay? -- Joe became the CFO -- isn't this action done by Joe?

The question that we should ask while evaluating the correct usage of the comma + verb-ing modifier is who or whose action is responsible for the action denoted by the verb-ing modifier. If the answer is yes, then the sentence uses the comma + verb-ing modifier correctly.

1B.Joe became the CFO of the company, a move that increased his pay significantly . -- makes sense


2A. Oliver won the best actor award , making him famous in no time. -- Oliver did not win make himself famous but his action of winning the best actor award did?
Did the action done by Oliver made him famous ? -- i think its a Yes.

2B. Oliver won the best actor award , a win that made him famous in no time. -- makes sense

The question that we should ask while evaluating the correct usage of the comma + verb-ing modifier is who or whose action is responsible for the action denoted by the verb-ing modifier. --> Here Oliver's action is reponsible for action denoted by verb-ing (making him....)

If the answer to the question is the doer of the modified action or the action done by the doer, then the sentence uses the comma + verb-ing modifier correctly.

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja ,egmat , mikemcgarry , daagh , ChiranjeevSingh ,sayantanc2k other experts - please enlighten about 1A and 2A .

In principle such present participle modifiers as mentioned in example 1A / 2A are adverbial modifiers (though some guides suggest that they modífy the preceding clause or the subject of the preceding clause) - These adverbial modifiers refer to the VERB of preceding clause in some way (by definition, adverbs refer to verbs or adjectives).

Once you take the above in consideration, the question of WHO did the action does not arise. Example:

1A. The adverbial modifier, "increasing" refers to the verb "become". ("increasing" is the result of "becoming".)
2A. The adverbial modifier, "making" refers to the verb "won". ("making" is the result of "winning".)

In either case, the subject of the verb OR the present participle does not come into consideration whatsoever.

[Also note that adverbial present participle modifiers need not be the effect of the verb they refer to - they may as well be the cause. Example:
Steffi won the Wimbledon, defeating Sabatini.]

1A. Joe became the CFO of the company, increasing his pay significantly.
2A. Oliver won the best actor award, making him famous in no time.

3. Between 14,000 and 8,000 b.c. the ice cap that covered northern Asia, Europe, and America began to melt, uncovering vast new areas that were to be occupied by migrating peoples moving northward.-- This is an official sentence ( https://gmatclub.com/forum/between-14-0 ... 42405.html )

4. Natasha's father wants her to become a doctor, making a difference in people's lives.

Q 1- The usage of verb-ing modifiers 'increasing' and 'making' in 1A and 2A is correct?
Q 2- Also, as per the official example 3, the ice cap did not itself uncover vast new areas, but the uncovering occurred as a result of the ice cap melting.
Q 3- Please provides your views on example 4. Verb-ing modifier making makes sense with 'to become' and not verb 'wants'.

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , GMATGuruNY , VeritasPrepBrian , MartyTargetTestPrep , DmitryFarber , VeritasKarishma , generis , jennpt , other experts - please enlighten

1A seems a little funny, because actually someone else increased Joe's pay when he became CFO. Still, I supposed that, in some sketchy way, that sentence works, though probably the meaning that it seeks to express would be better expressed in another way.

2A seems OK, if it is meant to express that, via winning the award, Oliver made himself famous. The pronoun "himself" is better for that spot than the pronoun "him." Notice how natural this version sounds.

Oliver won the best actor award, making himself famous in no time.

That sentence is OK, though a bit funny, because, as you said, the ice cap didn't really uncover.


I'm pretty sure that I have seen cases in which verb-ing modifiers work with preceding actor action pairs, even if those actors and actions are not expressed via subjects and verbs in clauses. However that sentence, with the actor "her" and the infinitive "to become" modified by a verb-ing modifier, just doesn't seem to work. Probably would be better as:

Natasha's father wants her to become a doctor and make a difference in people's lives.

egmat

Thanks for the post.
I have a query on the usage of a verbing modifier when modifying a clause.

I will be very grateful if any expert (egmat, generis, MikeScarn, GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, hazelnut, @daagh) is able to guide me here

I will elaborate below :

A - Mary made a beautiful bouquet, winning her accolades
B - A beautiful bouquet was made by Mary, winning her accolades

Here, in the above sentence A winning presents the result of the action of making the bouquet. Both the act of winning and the act of making the bouquet were performed by Mary. Hence the use of verbing is unambiguous.

Further, in the sentence B. Here the subject of the clause is the bouquet, however, the action of making the bouquet is performed by Mary only.

Which of the following understanding is correct in such type of construction (sentence B) ;
The DOER of the verbing and the DOER of the verb that the verbing is modifying should be the same.
or
The DOER of the verbing and the subject of the clause that the verbing is modifying should be the same.

Essentially, the question is around the role of verbing in a passive construction.

Many thanks for your guidance in advance.

Regards
SS

Hie,

Thanks for a detailed article . I have one question the usage of #2. Placed after a clause NOT PRECEDED by a comma, doesn't this makes -ing a participle in absence of COMMA ?

1.a. The 22 Oscars won by Walt Disney were awarded to him between 1932 and 1969, outnumbering the number of Oscars ever awarded to anyone else in the Oscar history.
The verb-ing modifier makes sense with the subject of preceding clause '22 Oscars' but is not directly attributable to event in the main clause?

b. The 22 Oscars won by Walt Disney, which were awarded to him between 1932 and 1969, outnumber the number of Oscars ever awarded to anyone else in the Oscar history.

2. The newly-wed bride proudly flashed the wedding ring, an elaborately crafted piece of jewelry encrusted with diamonds, adorning her hand.

The appositive phrase ' an elaborately crafted piece of jewelry encrusted with diamonds' describes the wedding ring. So it this use acceptable?

Will verb-ing 'adorning' modify 'ring' or the entire preceding clause and its subject 'bride'?

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , GMATGuruNY , VeritasPrepBrian , MartyTargetTestPrep , DmitryFarber , VeritasKarishma , generis , daagh , RonPurewal , other experts - please enlighten

skywalker
Can you please remove the parenthesized inessential modifier together with both the commas and see whether the ring now modifies the hand?

Exactly. There is not a logical connection between "were awarded" and "outnumbering."


This version makes much more sense than the previous version makes.


Yes. The appositive is perfectly structured and placed.


The structure of the sentence leaves open which the modifier modifies. Given the structure, the modifier could modify either "ring" or the entire preceding clause.

At the same time, because the sentence makes sense if the modifier modifies "ring" and does not make sense if the modifier modifies the entire preceding clause, logic dictates that the modifier must modify "ring."