Last visit was: 21 Jul 2024, 20:54 It is currently 21 Jul 2024, 20:54
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 2701
Own Kudos [?]: 7862 [0]
Given Kudos: 56
GMAT 2: 780  Q50  V50
Current Student
Joined: 24 Jan 2017
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [0]
Given Kudos: 1120
Location: Brazil
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
Schools: Fuqua '24 (A)
GPA: 3.2
WE:Consulting (Health Care)
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15126
Own Kudos [?]: 66769 [1]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Posts: 422
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [0]
Given Kudos: 738
Location: India
WE:Account Management (Hospitality and Tourism)
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
As explained in the post (link below) that COMMA + VERB 'ING' modifies the nearest preceding ACTION (say action no. 1):
Can we eliminate the option in case it fails to do so?
OR,
We must further roll our eyes back to see if the ACTION preceding (say action no. 2) to the nearest ACTION, action no. 1, can be the logical referent, and if the action no. 2 makes sense, then action no. 2 is RIGHTFULLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY the correct referent for COMMA+VERB 'ING'?

https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-natural-re ... l#p2434132
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 3480
Own Kudos [?]: 5208 [1]
Given Kudos: 1431
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Pankaj0901 wrote:
As explained in the post (link below) that COMMA + VERB 'ING' modifies the nearest preceding ACTION (say action no. 1):
Can we eliminate the option in case it fails to do so?

Not necessarily.

Quote:
OR,
We must further roll our eyes back to see if the ACTION preceding (say action no. 2) to the nearest ACTION, action no. 1, can be the logical referent, and if the action no. 2 makes sense, then action no. 2 is RIGHTFULLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY the correct referent for COMMA+VERB 'ING'?

https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-natural-re ... l#p2434132

Yes, exactly.
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2017
Posts: 195
Own Kudos [?]: 19 [0]
Given Kudos: 92
Location: India
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun
sir why usage of overlooking(Verb-ing) incorrect in option A,B &C
can't we say To rebuild communities (ARE) overlooking......
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Posts: 5128
Own Kudos [?]: 4693 [0]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
saby1410 wrote:
MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun
sir why usage of overlooking(Verb-ing) incorrect in option A,B &C
can't we say To rebuild communities (ARE) overlooking......

Hello saby1410,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the use of "overlooking" in A, B, and C forms the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "overlooking" in this sentence)" construction; if this construction modifies a clause, it conveys that the subject of the clause performs the action that the participle refers to.

In this case, that subject is "A natural response", so the use of "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "overlooking" in this sentence)" illogically implies that the natural response overlooks the possibility that the forces that caused the disaster could be repeated.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2017
Posts: 195
Own Kudos [?]: 19 [0]
Given Kudos: 92
Location: India
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
ExpertsGlobal5 wrote:
saby1410 wrote:
MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun
sir why usage of overlooking(Verb-ing) incorrect in option A,B &C
can't we say To rebuild communities (ARE) overlooking......

Hello saby1410,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the use of "overlooking" in A, B, and C forms the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "overlooking" in this sentence)" construction; if this construction modifies a clause, it conveys that the subject of the clause performs the action that the participle refers to.

In this case, that subject is "A natural response", so the use of "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "overlooking" in this sentence)" illogically implies that the natural response overlooks the possibility that the forces that caused the disaster could be repeated.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

But it's not always the case there are some instances where subject doesn't makes sense with verbing but still correct and modifies the clause

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5318
Own Kudos [?]: 4736 [1]
Given Kudos: 660
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
1
Kudos
saby1410 wrote:
MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun
sir why usage of overlooking(Verb-ing) incorrect in option A,B &C
can't we say To rebuild communities (ARE) overlooking......

Hi saby1410,

I don't think overlooking is impossible in A and B. Ambiguous perhaps, but not impossible. Option C is different though, because the verb overlook should be followed by a noun, not a that-clause.

The ambiguity comes from a secondary meaning of overlook (~to provide a view of, usually from above) that could apply to the same site.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4422
Own Kudos [?]: 31319 [0]
Given Kudos: 642
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
saby1410 wrote:
But it's not always the case there are some instances where subject doesn't makes sense with verbing but still correct and modifies the clause

Posted from my mobile device

Hello saby1410,

Hope you are doing good.

I am aware that you have gotten the reply to your question about the use of "overlooking..." in this official question. Yes, we can work with "overlooking..." in the sentence. However, correct answer choices are very precise and present the intended logic in a very clear manner. That's the reason why "overlooking..." is not preferred in the context of the sentence. Also, all the answer choices with "overlooking..." has very blatant errors. So, they are out any which way.

Now, what got me curious to respond to you is your statement in the post. It is not so that in some sentences, the comma + verb-ing modifier works even if it does not make sense with the subject/doer of the modified action. In fact, it is a condition that must be met for the correct usage of the comma + verb-ing modifier.

I would like to direct you to a comprehensive article written by e-GMAT on the usage of Comma + Verb-ing Modifiers: https://success.e-gmat.com/VerbingModifiers_1

You may be familiar with a lot of content in this article. However, it is good to revise such complex topics regularly. Moreover, the thread has discussions on many official questions that use this modifier. You can go through them and ascertain how well you know about the usage of this modifier in official sentences.

Hope this helps.
Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions on this topic or anything SC.
Happy Learning!!
Intern
Joined: 14 Oct 2022
Posts: 22
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 39
Location: India
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
egmat - What I have learned from your course that "," + verb-ing modifies the entire preceding clause. I was fixated between E and C, cause there is no other differentiable clue except "Overlooking" vs "without considering".

Intern
Joined: 14 Oct 2022
Posts: 22
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 39
Location: India
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
sayantanc2k wrote:
rishit1080 wrote:
misterJJ2u wrote:
A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is to rebuild on teh same site, overlooking the possibility that the forces that caused it could be repeated.

(b) overlooking the possibility that the forces causing it could be repeated
(c) overlooking that the forces that caused the disaster could also cause another one
(d) without considering that the forces causing the disaster could be repeated
(e) withouth considering that the forces that caused the disaster could also cause another such disaster

What's wrong with A sayantanc2k

On re-examining the question, I could understand a solid reason (which I missed in my previous post) that option E is the best answer.

Comma + present participle modifier should refer to the subject of the previous clause or the effect of the entire clause. Here "Overlooking .... " wrongly suggests that "A natural response" (subject of the previous clause) overlooks, not the "communities". Hence option A, B And C can be eliminated.

The intended meaning is that the disaster, not the forces, would be repeated. Hence option A, B AND D can be eliminated.

Option E is the correct answer.

usaidmandvia Previously I missed the modifier problem as mentioned above in this post - why C is incorrect is explained above.

sayantanc2k - I was also confused between c & e, but chose c because of the phrase "cause another such disaster" in e. Isn't such/other/another meaning the same and using 2 of them together creates redundancy? I have seen other examples in official questions where such & other don't work together.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5318
Own Kudos [?]: 4736 [2]
Given Kudos: 660
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
2
Kudos
SohiniSengupta wrote:
sayantanc2k - I was also confused between c & e, but chose c because of the phrase "cause another such disaster" in e. Isn't such/other/another meaning the same and using 2 of them together creates redundancy? I have seen other examples in official questions where such & other don't work together.

Hi SohiniSengupta,

Such provides us additional information. For example, consider the sentences below:

1. The last question was really tough. I don't want to solve another question.

2. The last question was really tough. I don't want to solve another such question.

The first one means that the author wants to stop solving questions. The second one means that the author is open to solving more questions, but doesn't want to solve more questions that are similar to (as tough as or tougher than) the one he/she just solved.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4422
Own Kudos [?]: 31319 [0]
Given Kudos: 642
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
SohiniSengupta wrote:
I was also confused between c & e, but chose c because of the phrase "cause another such disaster" in e. Isn't such/other/another meaning the same and using 2 of them together creates redundancy? I have seen other examples in official questions where such & other don't work together.

Hi SohiniSengupta,

I've recently created a video solution for this question in which I've discussed each answer choice in detail. You'll find the video here.

Hope this helps.

Happy learning!

Abhishek
Manager
Joined: 30 Nov 2018
Posts: 139
Own Kudos [?]: 151 [0]
Given Kudos: 79
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GPA: 4
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
Choice A, D and B states that it is the forces that caused disaster could be repeated. This is incorrect. It is the disaster that itself that could be repeated. Hence, A, D and B are out.

In choice C, <<overlooking that the forces>> is not idiomatic. Overlooking has a physical meaning such as Overlooking a site. C is out.

E has none of the flaws and hence is the correct answer.

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2020
Posts: 93
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 95
GMAT 1: 610 Q40 V35
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
ExpertsGlobal5 wrote:
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

misterJJ2u wrote:
A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is to rebuild on the same site, overlooking the possibility that the forces that caused it could be repeated.

(A) overlooking the possibility that the forces that caused it could be repeated
(B) overlooking the possibility that the forces causing it could be repeated
(C) overlooking that the forces that caused the disaster could also cause another one
(D) without considering that the forces causing the disaster could be repeated
(E) without considering that the forces that caused the disaster could also cause another such disaster

Choice A: In Option A, we see a pronoun ambiguity error; the pronoun "it" could refer to "site" or "earthquake or flood". Moreover, Option A also suffers from a modifier error; the modifying phrase "overlooking the possibility" incorrectly modifies "A natural response", rather than "communities". Additionally, this answer choice alters the intended meaning of the sentence; a close reading of Option A will show that it refers to the possibility of the forces being repeated, rather than the event the forces caused. Thus, Option A is incorrect.

Choice B: Option B repeats the meaning-related and modifier errors of Option A. Thus, Option B is incorrect.

Choice C: Option C also suffers from the modifier error found in Options A and B. Moreover, it suffers from ambiguity in the phrase "overlooking that" as "overlooking" can also mean to physically overlook something. Thus, Option C is incorrect

Choice D: Option D also suffers from the meaning-related errors found in Options A and B. Thus, Option D is incorrect.

Choice E: Option E suffers from no modifier errors and clearly conveys the intended meaning of the sentence. Thus, Option E is correct.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of “Avoiding Pronoun Ambiguity” on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hi @experts' Global Team,

Please could you let me know if my reasoning is right? I appreciate that there is a grammatical error here but I think that there's also a logical issue. I wanted to give another reason why "it" cannot refer to "earthquake/flood" :-

Since we need to ensure that the pronoun after the comma must replace either of the 2 disasters "it" cannot refer to "earthquake/flood" - because the 2 types of disasters mentioned are examples and either of the 2 could be repeated - hence in order to more precise and clear I believe we should repeat the noun in terms of providing an "such a disaster". Is this right?

Intern
Joined: 07 Jul 2023
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
GMAT 1: 760 Q51 V41
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
Re: A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is [#permalink]
JonShukhrat wrote:
daagh wrote:
Jon, do you mean that the participles (, overlooking) and (, without considering) modify the subject of the previous clause, (namely the response) rather than the subject and the action of the subject (namely the response and its action to rebuild)?

Then don't you think that it would be a misnomer to call them adverbial modifiers?

If one really meant to modifiers to modify the subject, then one would change the word order as ---

Quote:
Overlooking the possibility that the forces that caused it could be repeated, a natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is to rebuild on the same site.

Dear daagh,

(Sorry for such a long post. I tried to be as much precise as I can so that beginners could benefit from it.)

Today I’ve had enough time to reflect on this question. And, with your permission, I’d like to share with you some findings.

A. I think we need to modify too widespread but not always correct notion: “comma + verbing must modify the subject and the action of that subject in the preceding clause”.

Let’s use more precise description from GMATGuruNY and RonPurewal: “COMMA + VERBing serves to refer to the nearest preceding action and the performer of that action.” This precision is indeed important because the performer of the action is NOT always the subject of the preceding clause. Below are two examples:

B. Mitch Hunt gives a good explanation of how comma+verbing works here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/?href=-map-e ... 84515.html

- Geologists use a network of seismometers to chart seismic waves that originate in the earth's crust and ricochet around its interior, travelling most rapidly through cold, dense regions and more slowly through hotter rocks.

Here, the subject of the main sentence is “geologists”, and the action of this subject is “use”. So, according to widespread notion, comma+travelling should refer to “geologist” and “use”. But that’s incorrect because geologists are not travelling through hotter rocks. Actually, comma + travelling here refers to the nearest preceding action “ricochet” and its performer “seismic waves”. And it’s perfectly logical to say that seismic waves ricochet while travelling through certain regions of earth’s crust. We can also note that “waves” is not the subject of the sentence, and “ricochet” is not the main verb. That’s why we need a more precise description.

C. Another good example comes from Ron. He says: Note that i've been careful to say that these modifiers describe "actions". i.e., I’m careful NOT to say "verbs". For example:

- I peeked into the workshop and saw the master watchmaker leaning over the table, squinting at the tiny parts of an old Rolex.

Ron: here, comma + "squinting..." describes the action of "leaning over the table".
"leaning" isn't technically a verb, but it still represents an action (and is ultimately derived from a verb).

Once again, comma + squinting is not referring to the subject of the sentence “I” and its action “peeked” or “saw”, but referring to the nearest action “squinting” and its performer “the master watchmaker”.

Small conclusion: COMMA + VERBing serves to refer to the nearest preceding action and the performer of that action. And that performer is not always the subject of the sentence.

Considering all the above, we can finally dissect our original question:

- A natural response of communities devastated by earthquake or flood is to rebuild on the same site, without considering that the forces that caused the disaster could also cause another such disaster.

Here, “without considering” refers to “to rebuild” because “to rebuild” is the nearest preceding action. And it’s logical to say that someone fails to consider a danger while rebuilding the communities. So “without considering” makes sense with “to rebuild”. However, “without considering” doesn’t necessarily have to make sense with the subject of the sentence “a response of communities” - because “a response of communities” is not the performer of the action “to rebuild”. The performer of “rebuild” is implied but not clearly shown here.

Let me, please, try to be a bit more precise so that I can explain what I mean. the construction “a natural response is to rebuild” is similar to “A is B” in which both A and B are nouns. “to rebuild” is a noun here, and “to rebuild” is equal to “a natural response”. So, “a response” is not the performer of “to rebuild”, and hence “without considering” doesn’t have to modify “a response”.

There is a similar example:

- The main rule of bungee jumping is to jump with wide open arms, without looking down.

Here, neither “main rule” nor “bungee jumping” performs the action “jump”. The actual performer (people) is implied but not explicitly shown. “without looking down" makes sense with “to jump” and its implied performer (people), but doesn’t necessarily have to make sense with the subject of the sentence “main rule”. The same is true for the original sentence.

Main conclusion: “without considering” does make sense with the nearest action “to rebuild” and its implied performer (people), but doesn’t necessarily have to make sense with the subject of the sentence “a natural response”.

There is a similar official example here, with GMATGuruNY 's detailed explanation: https://gmatclub.com/forum/?href=.html#831859