Hi Himanshu,

• The intricate structure of the compound insect eye, having hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, help explain why scientists have assumed that it evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

It is true that comma + verb-ing modifies the preceding clause. But that happens when comma + verb-ing modifier is placed after a clause. There may be instances where you will see comma + verb-ing modifier is placed after the subject. In that case, the comma + verb-ing modifier modifies the subject.

Grammatically, in this OG 13#7 problem, “having” is modifying the subject “The intricate structure of the compound eye” after which it has been placed. However, this leads to illogical meaning. Now the sentence means that the intricate structure has hundreds of miniature eyes. Hence, we certainly have modifier error here.

Now, study the following OG 13#25 problem,

• Neuroscientists, having amassed a wealth of knowledge over the past twenty years about the brain and its development from birth to adulthood, are now drawing solid conclusions about how the human brain grows and how babies acquire language.

In this sentence, usage of “having” is absolutely correct. It is placed after the subject “neuroscientists” and hence correctly modifies that entity. The meaning here is that neuroscientists have amassed a wealth of knowledge… The modification conveys the logical meaning.

Now let’s talk about the comma + with modifiers. So here we are talking about prepositional phrases. “with” modifiers are very versatile modifiers. They can modify either the preceding clause or the preceding nouns. What they modify actually depends on the context of the sentence and the wording of the modifier itself.

• Bihar is India's poorest state, with an annual per capita income of $111.

In this sentence, with modifier actually modifies the preceding noun. With modifier in this sentence has the following sense. Notice how “which has” can be understood to replace “with”.
India’s poorest state, which has an annual per capita income of $111

However, this modifier can be understood to modify the subject of the clause as well because of the nature of the verb - is. This is a linking verb, which establishes the following relationship:
Bihar = India’s poorest state.

Now lets consider a scenario in which “with” modifier modifies the preceding clause. This is a GMATPrep Question. You can find the detailed solution of this question at this link.

Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging like socks on a clothesline.

The comma +with modifier above modifies the preceding clause. In essence this sentence can be written as two separate sentences:

1. Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches.
2. Their arms and legs are hung like socks on a clothesline.

So sentence 2 has been converted into with modifier. This modifier extends the thought of the preceding clause by providing a detail supporting it.

Now if the above sounds very complicated, then do not worry about it. As long as you know that these modifiers are versatile and hence can modify preceding clause and preceding nouns, you would be fine. Let the meaning of the sentence guide you. You should understand the meaning of the sentence and ensure that one of these roles fit well.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.

Hi Debayan,

Yes, you are absolutely correct. The correct naswer is indeed choice E. Why don't you share your analysis with all of us?

Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi debayan,

Good analysis there. However, I have one question for you. What is the antecedent of pronoun "it" in choice A and E? Looking forward to your reply.

Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi debayan,

I kind of got it that you think that “it” refers to “The intricate structure of the compound insect eye”. So per your answer, the sentence says that the intricate structure of the compound insect eye, having hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that “the structure” evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

Now, tell me does that make sense? Can a structure evolve? That to independently of the vertebrate eye?

So, pronoun “it” does not refer to “the structure”. This “it” refers to “the compound insect eye”. And the scientists now have the reason to explain why they assume that the compound insect eye evolved independently of the vertebrate eye. This is the logical meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha