Astronomers have theorized that the Big Bang governs the behavior of

Astronomers have theorized that the Big Bang governs the behavior of interstellar dust, particles that comprise the atoms and molecules created in the progenitive explosion and persisting in even the emptiest regions of space

A. persisting [Correct]
B. persists [Wrong for sub-verb agreement ]
C. persisted [atoms still persist]
D. they persist [not parallel with the sentence structure]
E. are persisting [wrong tense]

A. persisting
B. persists --> singular whereas particles is plural
C. persisted --> wrong tense
D. they persist --> inaccurately points to compounded noun 'atoms and molecules'
E. are persisting --> awkward

I will pick A by POE

A. both participals should be paralled. one is past participals and the other one is present participals.

The OA for this is "A".

One of the tricky SCs. I suggest all my friends to have a look at these SCs too...

https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=16199
https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=25669

Well tried everyone. HIMALAYA, it's nice to see you back

A. There are two modifying phrases describing the atoms and molecules: created in the progenitive explosion and persisting in even the emptiest regions of space. Parallelism demands that each begin with a participle.

The past participle persisted would be inappropriate, because atoms and molecules is the subject, not the object, of persist. (They were created, but they persist.) The present participle--persisting--is correct when forming a modifier that specifies an action performed by the modified noun.

Astronomers have theorized that the Big Bang governs the behavior of interstellar dust, particles that comprise the atoms and molecules created in the progenitive explosion and persisting in even the emptiest regions of space.

The part after particles is a modifier, then after it we find "and" => a parallelism marker.

a persisting
e are persisting

The ING form of a verb is used as a modifier, whereas "are persisting" is not a modifier but it's a "real" verb, so the setence with A looks like this:
(...), particles that modifier and modifier.

The verb "are persisting" moreover gives us an idea of an on-going action, the particles are persisting (RIGHT NOW) in even the emptiest regions of space.
This is not the intended meaning of the sentence, hope it's clear

Dear GMAT40,
It's very important to understand the grammatical layout of the surrounding material. The words "interstellar dust" is the object of the preposition "of". The sentence could actually end there, and be a simple & complete sentence. Instead, we get an appositive phrase, "particles", which modifies and describes the "interstellar dust".

Then we have a "that" clause, modifying "particles" ---- it's a vital noun modifier, because without the "that" clause, the word "particles" is pretty bland and undescriptive. Every "that" clause must have a full SUBJECT + VERB structure. The pronoun "that" itself is the subject, and comprise is the verb. The nouns "atoms and molecules" constitutes the direct object of comprise.

The nouns "atoms and molecules" is modified by one participial phrase "created in the progenitive explosion", and the question here poses --- what's going on with the "persist" verb and the predicate that follows it?

The "persist" verb must take a form so that it is a second participle phrase parallel to the first. At the level of grammar, if we wanted to introduce more action here, something else doing the "persisting" besides the "atoms and molecules", then it would violate parallelism to have the first participle phrase, then the word "and", and then something that's not a participial phrase. We would need more commas or something else to guide us if we wanted the "persist" phrase to be parallel to something somewhere else in the sentence. At the level of logic, we are describing the origin & ongoing state of these "atoms and molecules" ---- logically, it makes sense for the "persist" phrase to be in parallel to the "created" phrase.

Therefore, for a couple reasons, the second phrase must be a participle phrase in parallel to the first, and demands the participle "persisting", not a full verb, such as "are persisting."

Incidentally, this is not a very well written question. The word "progenitive" is awfully fancy, a bit too fancy for GMAT SC standards. More importantly, the sentence misuses the word "comprise" ---- a diction mistake the GMAT would never make.

I hope all this helps.
Mike

@mikemcgarry....Thank you for detailed explanation. My doubt here is how did you deduce that "persist" is an action of "atoms and molecules", it could be an action of "Particles"and in that case shouldn't the verb "persist" be parallel to "comprise" and would need a full verb rather than a participle. I chose the answer "are persisting".

Dear hitesh2489,
I'm happy to respond.

Here's the beginning of the sentence:
Astronomers have theorized that the Big Bang governs the behavior of interstellar dust, ...

Now, if the "persist" verb is a participle, parallel to "created", we would have
particles that comprise the atoms and molecules
//created in the progenitive explosion
and
persisting in even the emptiest regions of space.
That is the OA for this question.

If the "persist" verb is a full verb, parallel to the verb "comprise," then the structure would be
particles that
//comprise the atoms and molecules created in the progenitive explosion
and
//persist in even the emptiest regions of space.
First of all, it's not necessary, but it would add to the clarity to add a second "that" --- "that comprise ... that persist."

With the second "that," the parallelism to the verb "comprise" would be very clear. Even without that, it would still be substantially correct to have the verb "persist."

The choice "are persisting" is a brilliant trap answer. From a strict mathematical grammatical perspective, it would be technically correct, but it sounds absolutely awful. I know that this can be a very tricky issue for folks who have learned English as a second language. Any native speaker instantly sees that this is unacceptable. We use the present progressive for an ongoing activity, for an action, someone doing something. The verb "persist" is not really an active verb --- the participle simply continue to exist: they are not "doing" anything. That why, in almost any context, the present progressive form of the verb "persist" would sound awkward and unnatural. The same is true of other "existence" verbs, such as the verb "to be."

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Hi Mike,
I request you to kindly explain why (C) - persisted is incorrect ?

Regards

Dear tilkesh,

I'm happy to respond. Before I can answer your question effectively, I need to understand how you are thinking about this sentence. Tell me your understanding of what you think, or suspect, that (C) is correct. Explain exactly what you understand about the sentence and exactly what you don't understand, and I will be happy to help you.

Mike

Tilkesh has not responded but I will take this opportunity to respond because I also have same doubt

Please help me understand what am I missing here.

1. I think it is purely meaning that whether it should be persisted or persisting (means still persist), I do not see anything wrong grammatically with persisted.
2. While trying to make it parallel, it sounds better with Created And Persisted.

Dear neeraj609,
I'm happy to respond.

There are a few subtle ideas here. One is the idea of transitive vs. iintransitive verb. A transitive verb is one that takes a direct object:
we buy something
we say something
we borrow something
we use something
Those are all verbs that demand a direct object. If someone said "I buy" or "I borrow," that would be very confusing: the natural question would be "You buy what?" "You borrow what?"
Intransitive verbs are those that never take a direct object, that can't take a direct object.
we live
we sleep
we ail
we are
With these, it would sound unnatural to add a direct object: it would be awkward to say "I live something."

This distinction is confusing because many verbs can be used in both a transitive and intransitive sense:
intransitive: "I eat."--- transitive: "I eat a muffin."
intransitive: "I walk."--- transitive: "I walk the dog."
intransitive: "I play."--- transitive: "I play Monopoly."
These verbs can be used either on an intransitive sense (on their own, without a direct object) or in a transitive sense (with a direct object).

This distinction is important because any verb that is 100% intransitive can't be used in the passive sense. In the passive construction, the direct object becomes the subject, and if the verb never takes a direct object, nothing could ever be the subject of its passive formed. This is the consequence with full verbs.

It gets even more complicated with participles. The present participle (the "ing" participle) is an active participle. Every verb on the planet has a present participle. The past participle (the "ed" form for regular verbs) is a passive participle. Therefore, we cannot construct the passive participle of an intransitive verb and use it as a modifier.

Now, with all this terminology, we can discuss this particular sentence and your question.
The verb "to create" is a transitive verb.
I can create a sense of expectation about something.
God created the Heaven & Earth.
The verb takes direct objects. This means that we can use it both active and passive forms as a full verb, and it also means we can construct both participles:
creating = the present active participle
created = the past passive participle

By contrast, the verb "to persist" is an intransitive verb. We can say "I persist," but we can't say "I persist something." This verb exists only in the active sense, never in the passive sense. Furthermore, it only has on participle
persisting = the present active participle
persisted --> the past participle cannot be used as a modifier.

In this sentence, "created" is use correctly as a modifier. We need to put another modifier in parallel with it. The word "persisted" could be a past tense full verb (e.g. "The kingdom persisted for many centuries."), but we absolutely cannot use "persisted" as a participle, as a noun modifier. If we want a participle modifier in parallel, our only option is "persisting," the only participle the verb "to persist" has.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Great explanations mikemcgarry. Many Kudos!!

One clarification question - "particles are persisting" is awkward because particles are not doing anything is what you mentioned above in one of your posts. Does this mean "are verb-ing" structure can be used only with animate objects such as people or animals and not with inanimate objects such as things etc.?

Hi Mike,

Thank you for the explanation. I chose A because i thought we are talking about particles - and due to parallelism we need to choose persists e.g. particles that create ------- and persists. It does miss that to complete the parallelism but I thought we are referring back to particles.


How do i avoid such misses in future?

Dear manhasnoname

I'm happy to respond.

First of all, my friend, I am going to give you some advice. Learn the proper names of grammatical forms so that you can ask precise questions. Precise speech leads to precise understanding. Confused speech leads to confusion. Don't use the term "verb -ing"---an extremely sloppy term. The form of the verb that ends with "-ing" can have three different roles:
1) present participle
2) gerund
3) part of a present progressive verb
Those three are profoundly different and have completely different roles in sentences. Learn those terms and understand them. If you refer to them all as "verb -ing," then you inadvertently have set the conditions for a massive amount of confusion. Better to avoid that sloppy term entirely.

The present progressive tense is designed to show actions that are in progress, that are in the process of occurring. The distinction you suggested, about animate vs. inanimate subjects, is not helpful: either could be used with a verb in the present progressive. What matters, instead, is the type of verb.

Many verbs are what I would call action verb, doing verbs: to walk, to talk, to buy, to sell, to eat, to think, etc. When we put a subject in front of one of these verbs, we are saying that this subject is performing some activity.

A few verbs are what I would call being verb, verbs that describe not an activity but a state of being. Examples are: to be, to seem, to appear, to persist, etc.

The present progressive makes perfect sense with an action verb: she is walking, he is talking, she is buying, he is selling, she is thinking, etc.

With at least some being verbs, the verb already denotes an ongoing activity, so use of the present progressive is redundant and awkward: is being, is seeming, is persisting, etc. Those are always awkward and wrong.

We have to be careful, because this is not a sharp black & white distinction. Some verb (live, die, continue, survive, etc.) are being verbs but there are conditions in which the use of the present progressive would make sense: she is living, he is dying, she is continuing to do X, he is surviving by doing Y, etc.

How does one learn which being verbs are permissible in the present progressive and which are not? By reading. There is no shortcut for a thorough and consistent habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Does all this make sense?

Dear warriorguy

I'm happy to respond. What you are asking is an excellent question.

Ultimately, your question is about meaning. The GMAT SC is not simply a grammar test---the GMAT SC investigates how three important strands, grammar, logic, and rhetoric---all come together to produce meaning. There are no "tricks" for meaning: we always have to penetrate to what the author is trying to say.

This is a particularly tricky question, because the available answer choices limit the grammatical possibilities. Here's the question again.
Astronomers have theorized that the Big Bang governs the behavior of interstellar dust, particles that comprise the atoms and molecules created in the progenitive explosion and persisting in even the emptiest regions of space.
a) persisting
b) persists
c) persisted
d) they persisted
e) are persisting

When I first looked at this sentence, I thought that the underlined verb would be in parallel with the verb "comprise"---- the parallelism would be "particles that comprise ... and persist ...." Notice, though, that "persist" is not an answer choice.

You chose "persists." That's a singular verb, so it would not agree with the plural subject "participles." That's a straightforward SVA error.

The only legitimate plural verb is (E), "are persisting," which is very awkward, as I just explained to manhasnoname.

In fact, among the given answer choices, the only legitimate parallelism is that between participles, "created ... and persisting." This is a past passive participle in parallel with a present active participle, which is fine: tense does not matter for parallelism. This is the OA, answer choice (A).

Does all this make sense?
Mike

A. persisting
B. persists --> singular whereas particles is plural
C. persisted --> wrong tense
D. they persist --> inaccurately points to compounded noun 'atoms and molecules'
E. are persisting --> awkward.