A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulated the use of bicycles, manda

This question is a subtle mixture of a Parallelism error and Meaning
We can start by asking two questions:
What was the purpose of the New York City Ordinance? To regulate the use of bicycles.
How did it regulate the use of bicycles? - mandated......., required......
The third question will be. " What did it achieve by doing this?It granted pedestrians right- of- way.
Hence the 3 items of the list are: regulated, mandated and granted
A. Mandated, required and it granted...usage of the pronoun ‘it’ before granted is unnecessary and creates a Parallelism error.-INCORRECT
B. regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, granting ... granting is not parallel to the other two items of the list and is not a verb form; this option changes the intended meaning of the sentence...the last item in a list should be preceded by the co-ordinating conjunction, "AND"- INCORRECT
C. mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists : Usage of the pronoun 'it' creates a parallelism error… INCORRECT
D. Mandating, requiring are not active verb forms.........AWKWARD STRUCTURE, VERBS MISSING, CHANGES the intended meaning of the sentence. INCORRECT
E. Correct Answer: The modifying phrase, regulating the use of bicycles correctly modifies the Noun, Ordinance............mandated, required and granted- Parallelism maIntained: all the three actions are in the Simple Past Tense, 'And' is correctly used before the last item of the list.

for the kind attention of Mike



I have a doubt to ask Mike. Normally we use a verb to denote the primary function and modifiers to describe the secondary functions or the results or impact of the primary function. In this correct choice E, on the contrary, the prime function of regulation is relegated to a modifier role while the details or description of the regulation is accorded the verb status. Also if I take it right, the granting the right - of way - is a separate function for the regulation of the use of bicycles, since the right - of - way is in reference not only to the use of bicycles but also to the use of all vehicles such as cars, trucks, scooters, buses and so on that ply on the road. Therefore, it is logical to expect the second verb in the list to parallel another verb that goes with the primary function and not with the modifiers.
Would the following be a better choice?
E. regulated the use of bicycles, mandating a maximum speed of eight miles an hour and requiring cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted

Of course, in the exam, one can take no other choice but E because, per se, E is the only structurally parallel choice in the topic. Also one has to agree with the OA because if is from GMAT Prep

egmat sayantanc2k chetan2u

I agree that E is the least worst.

I have a doubt.
Ordinance did X Y and Z.
Now "granted " according to me is the result of the ordinance. When the ordinance passed few things were put into effect and the result was that the pedestrians got space.

Now according to egmat if something is the result then it should be in the VERB-ING form.

Additionally doesn't choice E make the verbs of New York parallel to Each other and in that makes the three verbs independent?

Plz explain mikemcgarry

Posted from my mobile device

HI generis,

In the above question, are required and granted verb ? If yes how to differentiate b/w verb and ed Modifier?

To be more precise when does a word act like a verb and ed modifier?

Can you pls explain in detail?

Hi NandishSS . . . and I thought drafting the answer to your other question presented a challenge?
(I'm still trying to figure out how to draft that answer in sensible English.)
For you, though? I will give this extremely tough subject a shot.
You asked a very good question.

In order to show people—especially native speakers— just how difficult the subject matter is, I will share the sentence that grammarians and linguists inflict on students and writers:

The horse raced past the barn fell.

That sentence is grammatical. No kidding.
Raced is an ED modifier. Fell is a verb.
(Meaning: The horse that was raced [by a rider] past the barn fell [down].)

[Preempting a question that I am sure will come from a few : yes, raced is an adjective derived from a reduced relative clause.
If you did not wish to ask that question, completely ignore my preemptive sentence. We are here to distinguish between a past tense verb and a past participle.)

I Googled that weird sentence and found an article written by C Cooley of Manhattan Prep about the subject of your question.
-- Ignore the first paragraph if it makes no sense.
-- Otherwise the article is excellent. The article is HERE

****
Yes, in option A these words are all verbs: regulated, mandated, required, and granted.
In option B, the first three are verbs, whereas granting is not. (The latter, a present participle, is a verbal and an adverbial modifier.)

These ED verbs in the options and many others in English are hard because the simple past tense and the past participle are the same word.

To add to the confusion in this sentence, the words are all separated by commas.
Commas often signal modifiers such as past participles (ED modifiers).

• When does a word act like a verb?
Verbs are action words.
A word acts like a verb when the word is an action that a subject takes.
-- She returned the dress to the department store.
A person can "do" this word. I returned home. He returned the favor.

• When does a word act like an ED modifier?

Modifiers describe other things, in this case, nouns. The ED modifiers are almost always adjectives that modify nouns.
(I have to say "almost always" because GMAC may suddenly endorse past participles as adverbial modifiers. Unlikely.)

A word acts like an ED modifier when it tells us something about a noun or what happens TO a noun that makes the noun have a characteristic.
-- The samosa, cooked to perfection, was delicious.
(The samosa was not raw. It was both cooked perfectly and delicious.
I am telling you about the noun's attributes -- the characteristics of this particular samosa. I am not telling you what this samosa did )

ED modifiers often describe the way people feel or states of being. The italicized ED words are all adjective modifiers. In the first two cases, they are also subject complements (the thing on the other side of a linking verb).
-- He felt frustrated by the tax forms.
-- My uncle, who was frustrated by the tax forms, stomped [verb!] off to see a tax lawyer.
-- My uncle, frustrated by the tax forms, stomped [verb!] off to see a tax lawyer.
Similar examples: A disappointed child. (The child feels disappointed.) An entertained crowd. (The crowd is not bored.)

TESTS that can help distinguish between a verb and an adjective

We can try a few different tests to determine whether something is an ED verb or an ED modifier (a past participle).
The tests are not perfect, but they often work.

• (1) Focus on the noun.
Did the noun do something? Can the subject verbED as an action? (verb)
Or did the noun get described? (ED modifier)
Or did something happen TO the noun? (almost always ED modifier)

ASK: is the subject doing that ____ED thing, or does that ____ED thing describe how the subject feels or what is happening TO the subject?
-- if the subject is the doer of the verbED word, then the verbED word is a past tense verb.
Is the verbED an action done by the subject?
-- if the verbED word describes how the subject feels or what is happening to the subject, then verbED is an adjective and therefore a past participle

Because I have inserted both an ED modifier and a past tense verb in the sentences below, they may seem difficult at first.
Read them a few times. See whether you can write a couple of similar sentences.

I have found that in the long-run, non-native speakers benefit more from sentences that contain both an ED verb and an ED adjective (past participle) modifier.

Vivek, exasperated by the noise in the club, exited quickly.
-- exasperated describes how Vivek felt and is an adjective.
-- exited is what Vivek did, the action he took.

The highly publicized ordinance established gun laws that had worked effectively in Scotland and in New Zealand. [sidebar: I can dream. Gotta start somewhere.]
-- publicized is an ED modifier of the noun ordinance
-- established is what the ordinance did and thus is a verb
-- worked is a past participle that is part of another verb and tells what gun laws did, so worked is not an adjective/modifier. It is a verb.

The neighbors' house, painted inside with drab colors, bothered him.
-- The house did not paint. Painted is an ED modifier, an adjective that describes the noun house.
-- By contrast, what did the house "do"? It bothered him.

• (2) The VERY test.
(This test excludes verbs better than it identifies adjectives.)

-- Many ADJECTIVES (verbEDs) can be modified by the word VERY.

-- A verb can never be modified by the word VERY.

-- Test: Place VERY in front of the word.
Does the phrase (including the words that follow the ED word) make sense?
No? Then the verbED is very likely a past tense verb. Make sure that it can change tenses (i.e., apply the other test below)

Yes? Then the verbED is a modifier (an adjective, a past participle). Careful. Some adjectives cannot take "very." IF "very" works, the word IS an adjective.

The ordinance very regulated the use of bicycles.
The ordinance very mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour.
The ordinance very required of cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars.
The ordinance very granted pedestrians the right of way.

The word VERY makes no sense when placed before those verbED words.
Very cannot be placed right before a verb.
If the phrase does not work with the word very, then the __ED word is very likely a past tense verb.

On the other hand, we can often place very before an ED modifier (an adjective, a past participle)

-- Vivek, very exasperated by the noise, exited quickly.
Exasperated works with very—exasperated thus is an ED modifier.

Try using "very" before "exited." Horrible. He very exited quickly?
No.
We could say that he exited very quickly, but then very modifies quickly, not exited.
Exited does not work with VERY. Exited is a verb.

-- The child, very frightened by the thunder, pulled the blanket over his head.
Frightened works with very and is an ED modifier.

By contrast, The child . . very pulled the blanket over his head? No. Ouch.
Pulled does not work with very and is a past tense verb.

See whether the VERY test helps to identify which words are ED modifiers and which words are verbs in these sentences:
1) The woman, thrilled to speak with someone who made sense, relaxed visibly.
2) The teacher, qualified to coach ESL students, qualified for the outreach program.
3) In the meeting, the aggravated man reached his limit and aggravated the situation by ridiculing other people.

• (3) The "can it change tense" test.

Verbs can change tenses and still be verbs.
_ED modifiers (adjectives) cannot change tenses and still be adjectives.
If changing tense of a word also changes that word's type or creates nonsense, then that word is an _ED modifier.

_ED modifiers (past participle adjectives) cannot change tenses and still be adjectives.
-- Vivek, exasperated by the noise, exited quickly.

We cannot change _ED modifier (adjective) exasperated into exasperates.
Vivek, exasperates by the noise, exits the club.

If we change exasperated to exasperates, we have created nonsense.

Depending on the placement of the _ED word, we may have improperly changed the adjective into a verb—and Vivek then is the doer of action who exasperates someone else!

Most importantly, we have lost the meaning that Vivek himself feels exasperated.

-- another example: we cannot change exasperated into the tense will exasperate:

Vivek, will exasperate by the noise, will exit the club.
Same problems as those above.

On the other hand, the past tense verb exited can change tenses and still be a verb, an action that Vivek takes.
When we change a past tense verb into a different tense, we have to place Vivek in a different time frame, but the word remains a verb.

These examples are okay because the past tense verbED is still a verb:
EXITED → EXITS: Vivek ... exits the club.
EXITED → WILL EXIT: Vivek will exit the club.
EXITED → IS/WAS EXITING: Vivek is exiting the club. Vivek was exiting the club.

If the _ED word can change tenses and be the same kind of word, then the _ED word is a verb.

If the _ED word can NOT change tenses and be the same kind of word, then the _ED word is a modifier (adjective).

***
HERE is a post from a source that I would not normally recommend, but the different kinds of answers may be helpful. (Scroll all the way down and ignore answers that are too easy or too hard to understand.)

(Whew. )

If it makes anyone feel better, NandishSS just asked a very hard question.
Native speakers sometimes do not understand how difficult this distinction can be.
One last time? This sentence is grammatical:
The horse raced past the barn fell.

I hope that analysis helps.

HI generis

I can just say WOW !!! Thanks for the detailed analysis

The correct answer is E.
Meaning: A NY city ordinance of 1897 (about what) regulating the use of the bicycle
(what it does) 1)mandated......, 2) required...., and 3)granted...
3 things are parallel. Now check answer which conveys a similar meaning.

A. regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required of cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted ...... Not parallel it granted and regulated incorrectly consider as 4 item in the list
B. regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, granting .... Not parallel granting and regulated.
C. regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted... same as A
D. regulating the use of bicycles, mandating a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, requiring of cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted.... Same as B
E. regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted ... Corrected regulating as the description of ordinance and 3 items of list in parallel (mandated,required,granted).

E is correct.

Always remember GMAT uses AND for giving a notion about parallelism and it should have equal ARMs in the both the parts left and r8 and those must be IC .
and in another case GMAT uses AND in list of items just before the end item .

A : regulated..mandated...required and it granted
B : ....granting has no main verb w.r.t subject so fragment
C : Same reason just like A
D : regulating..mandating...requiring of that they keep...and granted Awkward
E : regulating ( verbal ) ...mandated...required.. and granted perfect

thinkvision - isn't "granting pedestrians right-of-way" is the result of the ordinance?

A New York City ordinance of 1897 regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required of cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted pedestrians right-of-way.

A. regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required of cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted
(1) changes the meaning/false parallelism: the mandating, requiring and granting comes FROM the regulation – they are NOT on par with the “regulating” piece; the ordinance is regulating [the use of bikes] (leading to the) MANDATED X, REQUIRED Y, and GRANTED Z. The regulation leads to the mandating and all; (2) unnecessary/redundant pronoun: the “it” at the very before “granted” is redundant because it’s already implied what we are speaking about – the “ordinance”

B. regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, granting
(1) changes the meaning/false parallelism: the mandating, requiring and granting comes FROM the regulation – they are NOT on par with the “regulating” piece; the ordinance is regulating [the use of bikes] (leading to the) MANDATED X, REQUIRED Y, and GRANTED Z. The regulation leads to the mandating and all;

C. regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted
(1) unnecessary/redundant pronoun: the “it” at the very before “granted” is redundant because it’s already implied what we are speaking about – the “ordinance”

D. regulating the use of bicycles, mandating a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, requiring of cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted
1) changes the meaning/false parallelism: the mandating, requiring and granting comes FROM the regulation – they are NOT on par with the “regulating” piece; the ordinance is regulating [the use of bikes] (leading to the) MANDATED X, REQUIRED Y, and GRANTED Z. The regulation leads to the mandating and all.

E. regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted
bingo

A,B,C are out right away due to 'it granted' and 'granting' do not follow parellelism . Between D and E .D is again wrong _ing and -ed parallelism . This leaves us with E .

Answering a query from Elite097, the parallelism break in Option A is, in fact, that "regulated the use of bicycles", "mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour", and "required...all time" are verb phrases, and "it granted...way" is an independent clause.

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

In answer choices A, C, and D, are the uses of "required..." correct i.e. are "required of cyclists to", "required cyclists that they", and "requiring of cyclists that they" idiomatic?
A) regulated the use of bicycles, mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required of cyclists to keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted
C) regulating the use of bicycles mandated a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, required cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and it granted
D) regulating the use of bicycles, mandating a maximum speed of eight miles an hour, requiring of cyclists that they keep feet on pedals and hands on handlebars at all times, and granted