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

It is currently 21 Oct 2014, 22:56

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Expert Post
25 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1298

Kudos [?]: 3667 [25] , given: 185

VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2013, 10:58
25
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
8
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Image

Hi all,

Recently, I came across a thread where the posters were discussing whether a comma + verb-ed modifier placed after a clause can jump over the Verb and modify the Subject. I have written a few articles on the usage of Verb-ed Modifiers.
(Following are the links for the same:
verb-ed-modifiers-vs-verb-ing-modifiers-125611.html
ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html )

As I have earlier mentioned in my articles on verb-ed modifiers, they are noun modifiers, and on GMAT they ALWAYS refer to the immediate preceding noun entity. Now this preceding entity can be a single noun word or a noun phrase.

If the immediate preceding noun entity is a noun phrase, then the verb-ed modifier may modify the head of this noun phrase if the context of the sentence so demands. This modification has been dealt with in great details in the article Noun modifiers can modify slightly far away noun. Here is the link for the same:

noun-modifiers-can-modify-slightly-far-away-noun-135868.html

VERB-ED MODIFIERS OUTSIDE THE GMAT WORLD


Outside the GMAT verbal, in general English language, we may come across instances where a comma + verb-ed modifier modifies the Subject of the preceding clause or for that matter, even the entire preceding clause. You may see these usages in articles from popular publications such as The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Economists, etc.

WE CARE FOR GMAT USAGE


Now let’s get back to the interesting question of the thread I mentioned in the beginning of this article (the inspiration for this article) – can a comma + verb-ed modifier placed after a clause modify the Subject of the preceding clause? My research of official questions let me say it confidently – NO. There is not a single official question in which I have seen this usage. If placed after a clause, comma or no comma, verb-ed modifier always modifies the immediate preceding noun/noun phrase.

VERB-ED MODIFIER DOES REFER TO THE SUBJECT


However when a verb-ed modifier begins a sentence, it ALWAYS modifies the Subject of the clause. We have plethora of official questions where we can see this usage. This is the most appropriate way to use the verb-ed modifier to modify the Subject of the clause. And yes, this usage is widely tested too. Here comes one of those many questions that test you on this usage. This is OG12#25:

Based on accounts of various ancient writers, scholars have painted a sketchy picture of the activities of an all-female cult that, perhaps as early as the sixth century B.C., worshipped a goddess known in Latin as Bona Dea, “the good goddess.”

(A) Based on accounts of various ancient writers
(B) Basing it on various ancient writers’ accounts
(C) With accounts of various ancient writers used for a basis
(D) By the accounts of various ancient writers they used
(E) Using accounts of various ancient writers (Correct answer)

Choice A is incorrect here because “Based”, the opening verb-ed modifier must refer to the Subject of the following main clause. The Subject of the main clause is “scholars”. It is evident that “based” does not logically modifies the Subject. We need a proper modifier in the beginning of the sentence to refer to “scholars”. This is the reason why Choice E is correct answer.

Let’s take another example where the usage of verb-ed modifier is NOT TESTED. This is the correct version of OG13#98:

Ranked as one of the most important of Europe’s young playwrights, Franz Xaver Kroetz has written forty plays; his works—translated into over thirty languages—are produced more often than those of any other contemporary German dramatist.

In this sentence, without any confusion, “ranked”, the verb-ed modifier modifies the Subject of the following clause “Franz Kroetz”. Because “ranked” is meant to modify “Franz Kroetz”, it has been placed in the beginning of the clause and not after the clause.

To reiterate the point I made earlier, because the verb-ed modifier is meant to modify the Subject of the main clause, “Ranked…” has been placed in the beginning of the clause and not after the clause.

Image


COMMA BEFORE VERB-ED MODIFIER DOES NOT AFFECT MODIFICATION


Another thing to note is that the comma before the verb-ed modifier has no bearing on the entity it will modify. On GMAT, verb-ed modifier ALWAYS refers to the immediate preceding noun. It is not so that if there is comma before the verb-ed modifier placed after the clause, the verb-ed modifier gets the liberty to jump over the verb to modify the Subject of the preceding clause. Let’s review OG13#81:

Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.

A. sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of
B. sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has been dated at 34 million years old, thus making it the earliest mammal known on
C. sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of
D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on (Correct answer)
E. sloth which, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the earliest known mammal of

In the original sentence, the verb-ed modifier “found” is not preceded by a comma but in choice D, it has been. Is that one of the reasons why choice D is better than choice A? One may say that because in choice A, “found” is not preceded by a comma, this verb-ed modifier refers to the immediate preceding noun “a sloth” and not “Fossils”, the entity that it should modify. But in choice D, the comma makes all the difference. Now “found” correctly refers to “Fossils”.

Well, if you think this could be a reason, think again. Preceded by a comma or not, “found” in both cases refer to the “Fossils” because that the entity that it is supposed to modify. Placement of a comma before it does not bring about any change in the entity that is meant to modify.
Choice A is incorrect for other reasons.

VERB-ED MODIFIER DOES NOT JUMP A VERB


There is no correct official question where verb-ed modifier jumps the verb to modify the Subject, but here is certainly an incorrect official questions where comma + verb-ed has been placed after the clause to refer to the Subject of the preceding clause. Let me bring that official example – OG13#57:

Many of the earliest known images of Hindu deities in India date from the time of the Kushan Empire, fashioned either from the spotted sandstone of Mathura or Gandharan grey schist.

A. Empire, fashioned either from the spotted sandstone of Mathura or
B. Empire, fashioned from either the spotted sandstone of Mathura or from
C. Empire, either fashioned from the spotted sandstone of Mathura or
D. Empire and either fashioned from the spotted sandstone of Mathura or from
E. Empire and were fashioned either from the spotted sandstone of Mathura or from

If we study this sentence carefully, we will notice that the verb-ed modifier “fashioned” is meant to modify the Subject of the preceding clause “Many of the earliest known images of Hindu deities”. This usage has been declared incorrect because per the OG explanation “fashioned” “suggests that the Empire (the closest noun), not the images of the deities, was fashioned out of those materials”.

From this explanation, we can understand that on GMAT, “verb-ed modifier” is used to modify “the closest noun”. If the verb-ed modifier placed after a clause is meant to refer to the Subject of the preceding clause, then it cannot be called the closest noun, especially if there is a noun immediately before the verb-ed modifier.

So we at e-gmat go by the rule that verb-ed modifier modifies the immediate preceding noun. If we come across an official sentence where we see otherwise, we will modify our rule to comply with the GMAT usages.

Image

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Attachments

Can Verb-ed modifiers refer to subjects, jumping a verb_V1.docx [474.19 KiB]
Downloaded 486 times

To download please login or register as a user


_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be


Last edited by egmat on 23 Aug 2013, 10:14, edited 1 time in total.
Kaplan Promo CodeKnewton GMAT Discount CodesManhattan GMAT Discount Codes
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 295
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 27

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2013, 23:58
there are many sc problem on gmatprep, in which do-ed phrase modifies the subject of the previous clause

the artical is great. however, placement of modifiers is the matter of optimization not the problem of absolute rule. This happen because of the nature of language

I write of CORRECT BUT NOT PREFER in this forum. please, search and read what I write.

gmat prefer object touching the verb. but this is not alway possible.

gmat prefer adjectival touching the noun modified. but this is not alway possible.

but if it is possible to get the preference, we do so. that is why in some sc problem, adjectival not touching noun modified is considered wrong and in other sc, adjectival not touching the noun modified is in the OA.

the context and meaing will guide us to the best choice, not perfect choice. this is the core of the game on sc. gmat want us to solve the problem of choosing better choice, not want us to apply and remember the absolute rule as a machine do. that is why the game gmat play is hard and beautiful

I get this new thinking on sc recently
_________________

If anyone in this gmat forum is in England,Britain, pls, email to me, (thanghnvn@gmail.com) . I have some questions and need your advise. Thank a lot.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Status: Applications.
Affiliations: None
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 17
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GMAT 2: 720 Q48 V41
GPA: 4
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 89

Reviews Badge
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 23 Aug 2013, 06:55
This article is awesome Shraddha. Thanks a lot. Gave you a kudos.:)
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 27

CAT Tests
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 23 Aug 2013, 10:07
vietmoi999 wrote:
there are many sc problem on gmatprep, in which do-ed phrase modifies the subject of the previous clause

the artical is great. however, placement of modifiers is the matter of optimization not the problem of absolute rule. This happen because of the nature of language

I write of CORRECT BUT NOT PREFER in this forum. please, search and read what I write.

gmat prefer object touching the verb. but this is not alway possible.

gmat prefer adjectival touching the noun modified. but this is not alway possible.

but if it is possible to get the preference, we do so. that is why in some sc problem, adjectival not touching noun modified is considered wrong and in other sc, adjectival not touching the noun modified is in the OA.

the context and meaing will guide us to the best choice, not perfect choice. this is the core of the game on sc. gmat want us to solve the problem of choosing better choice, not want us to apply and remember the absolute rule as a machine do. that is why the game gmat play is hard and beautiful

I get this new thinking on sc recently


Hi vietmoi999,
Can you please give question numbers of some of those officials questions in which you found verb-ed modifiers modifying subject of a clause or the complete clause ?
As of now, I buy the rules outlined in the articles. Please note that the author has already stated that she did not find any counter example!

Last edited by drebellion on 05 May 2014, 22:47, edited 2 times in total.
2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [2] , given: 27

CAT Tests
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 23 Aug 2013, 10:16
2
This post received
KUDOS
Hi Shraddha,
Thanks for yet another wonderful article. In past one week all have done is read all of your SC articles... :)
"if possible" please do not put the right answer in the question stem itself as you have put here (D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on (Correct answer))
May be just delay it by few lines.... the way you did for the next example question (OG13#57:).

I have a habit of first trying on my own before looking the solution. I guess that way reading is more engaging.
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1298

Kudos [?]: 3667 [2] , given: 185

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 23 Aug 2013, 11:09
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Hi drebellion,

Sure thing. Suggestion accepted. I will certainly keep this point in mind in the future.
Feedbacks are important as they help us bring out better content matter for the test takers. :-)

Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Expert Post
3 KUDOS received
BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 1117
Followers: 86

Kudos [?]: 563 [3] , given: 107

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 19 Sep 2013, 22:32
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Thanks Shradhha for another exciting article...I'd say it's a kind of recap on your earlier articles on 'Verb-ed'. +1

It'd be great to see some HARD question on this concept since it has been quite some time we haven't seen your missiles.So, please keep 'em coming...

P.S : Added it to my signature containing consolidation of your EXCELLENT articles :)
_________________

UPDATED : e-GMAT SC Resources-Consolidated || ALL RC Resources-Consolidated || ALL SC Resources-Consolidated || UPDATED : AWA compilations-109 Analysis of Argument Essays || NEW !!! GMAC's IR Prep Tool

GMAT Club guide - OG 11-12-13 || Veritas Blog || Manhattan GMAT Blog


KUDOS please, if you like the post or if it helps :-)

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 8

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 25 Jan 2014, 03:30
Hi Shraddha,

In the following question spawned is modifying giant fungus, so in this case verb-ed modifier is modifying the subject of the clause.Am i right? so this can be taken as an exception.
Scientists have recently discovered what could be the largest and oldest living organism on Earth, a giant fungus that is an interwoven filigree of mushrooms and root like tentacles spawned by a single fertilized spore some 10,000 years ago and extending for more than 30 acres in the soil of a Michigan forest.
Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1298

Kudos [?]: 3667 [4] , given: 185

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 27 Jan 2014, 10:19
4
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
iwill wrote:
Hi Shraddha,

In the following question spawned is modifying giant fungus, so in this case verb-ed modifier is modifying the subject of the clause.Am i right? so this can be taken as an exception.
Scientists have recently discovered what could be the largest and oldest living organism on Earth, a giant fungus that is an interwoven filigree of mushrooms and root like tentacles spawned by a single fertilized spore some 10,000 years ago and extending for more than 30 acres in the soil of a Michigan forest.


Hi iwill,

Let's first break this sentence into clauses to see if "a giant fungus" is really a subject or not.

Cl. 1: Scientists have recently discovered
Cl.2: what could be the largest and oldest living organism on Earth, a giant fungus
Cl. 3: that is an interwoven filigree of mushrooms and root like tentacles
Cont. of Cl. 2: spawned by a single fertilized spore some 10,000 years ago and extending for more than 30 acres in the soil of a Michigan forest.

As you can see, "a giant fungus" is NOT a Subject as it does not have a verb. Whatever we have have after "a giant fungus" are all modifiers that give additional information about that giant fungus. Here "spawned" and "extending" are jumping over the clause "that is an... tentacles" because essentially this Relative Pronoun Clause is a Noun Modifier that modifies the same entity that "spawned" and "extending" modify. Also, this "that clause" cannot be placed anywhere else in the sentence without violating the meaning the sentence.

Hence, this is NOT an exception to the case.

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Mar 2013
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

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

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 28 Jan 2014, 18:52
Thank you for the explanation.

I have a doubt, though.

What about this sentence?


Diabetes, together with its serious complications, ranks as the nation's third leading cause of death, surpassed only by heart disease and cancer.


It's the correct answer to OG#5.
3 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 87
Location: Australia
Schools: AGSM '22
GMAT Date: 04-01-2014
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 36 [3] , given: 24

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 28 Jan 2014, 20:47
3
This post received
KUDOS
brunoferreira wrote:
Thank you for the explanation.
Diabetes, together with its serious complications, ranks as the nation's third leading cause of death, surpassed only by heart disease and cancer.



In this example the subject is connected to the noun object through linking verb/state verb to be


Diabetes is X, surpassed only by heart disease and cancer.

Here the past participle surpassed correctly modifies the object of the preceding clause cause of death, which is Diabetes, and it appears to be indirectly modifying Diabetes because of the linking verb.

I hope this help - and experts please correct me if I am wrong
_________________


Kudos (+1) if you find this post helpful. :)

Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1298

Kudos [?]: 3667 [0], given: 185

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 29 Jan 2014, 07:06
Expert's post
Hi brunoferreira,

code19 is a absolutely correct in his analysis of this sentence. Good job there code19. Keep it up. :-)

Diabetes, together with its serious complications, ranks as the nation's third leading cause of death, surpassed only by heart disease and cancer.

If we study this sentence, we will see that the Verb-ed Modifier actually modifies the preceding Noun Phrase "the nation's third leading cause of death".
Now since the nation's third leading cause of death = Diabetes, the said verb-ed modifier appears to be modifying "Diabetes".

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 295
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 27

Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 20 Mar 2014, 00:05
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies—less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies—less than those
B. movies—fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones

the above quesions is from gmatprep, so this problem is worth studying carefully
the oa is B.

the matter is "fewer than have been..." modify what?. it modifies the whole preceding clause and the "only seven persons" together. "is that right?

I have a similar example.

she has shown up for the writing class, seated at a desk in a small room (from yearning for learning by Christina Ianzito-Newyork time)

the point I want to say about above sentence is that do-ed can modify the subject and the preceding clause together. IS MY THINGKING CORRECT.? PLS EXPLAIN.

this point is relevant to official problem and so needed to be study carefully. pls, speake up
_________________

If anyone in this gmat forum is in England,Britain, pls, email to me, (thanghnvn@gmail.com) . I have some questions and need your advise. Thank a lot.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 27

CAT Tests
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 05 May 2014, 23:49
vietmoi999 wrote:
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies—less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies—less than those
B. movies—fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones


Hi Shraddha/e-GMAT experts,
Although this question is no way related to verb-ed modifier, still I request detail explanation of the correct answer. The way I see it:
Meaning:
IC1 - IC2. Per the original sentence IC2 preceded by "-" must give additional information/explanation about IC1.

IC1: Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, {the man-eater of the //movies} - modifier modifying shark
IC2: fewer than have been killed by bee stings.

In IC2 what is the subject? Ellipsis at play?
fewer than indicates that what is going to come has to be a number of people, but then it uses a plural verb.

I am interested in understanding the sentence structure.
The best reply I saw on this question was because "have been" parallels with have been in IC1 select this one. But I am not convinced with that approach. What is the subject of IC2?

can it be construed as say, "fewer than x people that have been killed by bee sting." x is not known. from the context all we can say is x is smaller than 7.

TIA for your reply,
DR

Last edited by drebellion on 10 May 2014, 23:53, edited 1 time in total.
1 KUDOS received
BSchool Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Let's Get Ready to Rhumble...
Affiliations: GMATClub ...
Joined: 20 Apr 2014
Posts: 211
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
GPA: 3.2
WE: Project Management (Other)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [1] , given: 418

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 10 May 2014, 22:17
1
This post received
KUDOS
vietmoi999 wrote:
Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the //movies—less than those //killed by bee stings.
A. movies—less than those
B. movies—fewer than have been
C. movies, which is less than those
D. movies, a number lower than the people
E. movies, fewer than the ones

the above quesions is from gmatprep, so this problem is worth studying carefully
the oa is B.

the matter is "fewer than have been..." modify what?. it modifies the whole preceding clause and the "only seven persons" together. "is that right?

I have a similar example.

she has shown up for the writing class, seated at a desk in a small room (from yearning for learning by Christina Ianzito-Newyork time)

the point I want to say about above sentence is that do-ed can modify the subject and the preceding clause together. IS MY THINGKING CORRECT.? PLS EXPLAIN.

this point is relevant to official problem and so needed to be study carefully. pls, speake up


Hi Guys,

My answer to this problem was wrong. :| I chose option E, and my thought process is elaborated as follows:

Phrase 1 : Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark,
Phrase 2: the man-eater of the movies —
Phrase 3: less than those killed by bee stings.

Meaning - In this century only 7 people have been killed by the great white shark. The great white shark are portrayed as man-eater in the movies. The number of such deaths is less than the number of deaths caused by bee stings.

Error Analysis - SV is OK, Verb is OK, phrase 2 correctly modifies the noun great white shark, and no parallelism error. The only error that I can see is the incorrect use of uncountable modifier "less than", that has been used for a countable noun.

POE -
A - incorrect for above reasoning.
B - i'd have chosen this if it was written this way - "movies—fewer than those who have been"
C - incorrect for above reasoning.
D - a number can't be lower than people, incorrect parallelism.
E - this option sounded correct to me - death of 7 people is fewer than the number of people killed by bee sting.

Can you advise me, where did I go wrong?
_________________

Was I helpful? Shower some kudos... :) Feeling sick with all that boring education or the stressful applications.?! Follow me I'll throw you some stressbusters.. ;)

LBS Research made easy - Check it out.
Check out for quick info about Tuck - Why Tuck? EA Round Pros & Cons. Admission Process and Tips.

Bored of all the GMAT and MBA stuff? Check this page out - Odds of meeting your spouse at MBA - it might give you something to laugh on or may be to be hopeful about... :)

Raves, rants and war stories of First Year MBA Students

Received an offer? Congrats! You might want to 'Negotiate the Offer'.

Be a sport. Update your profile here.

"GMAT conquered. Let's talk about applications..."
Persistence is the key. And I'm gonna make through...

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2013
Posts: 17
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 620 Q V
WE: Engineering (Other)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 12

CAT Tests
VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS [#permalink] New post 02 Aug 2014, 10:12
Hello Shraddha,

I'm just wondering...
You say that a verb-ed modifier placed after a clause ALWAYS modifies the closet noun.

In this sentence - Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991.....
You say that found modifies fossils, but sloth is the closest noun.

Can you please clear this out for me?

Thanks.
VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS   [#permalink] 02 Aug 2014, 10:12
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic Doubt on verb-ing modifiers gmatter0913 10 01 Mar 2014, 02:33
verb modifiers TomB 1 29 Aug 2012, 11:06
Adverb before Verb+Ing modifiers bagthegmat 2 22 Aug 2012, 18:57
89 Experts publish their posts in the topic Verb-ed modifiers Vs. Verb-ing modifiers egmat 48 06 Jan 2012, 08:46
1 Verb modifiers nonameee 8 19 May 2011, 03:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by

VERB-ED MODIFIERS CANNOT JUMP OVER VERBS

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.