Foi2Evei2
Hi
GMATNinja egmat This question is breaking my understanding.
At first, I understand that
S+V, participle has the rule that;
1. modify preceding clause
2. the doer of participle is the subject of the preceding clause
Meaning that, from the rule, we can use some step to eliminate the choice
From 1, we can check that the participle makes sense to modify the preceding clause or not
AND check the v.ing/v.ed form.
In this case;
1. JC held records,
earning them at a time... -> make sense because 'earning them at a time...' is try to let us know that
[i]how did JC hold these records[/i]
2. JC held records,
earned at a time... -> not make sense because JC cannot be earned. it should be 'Records were held by JC, earned at a time...' because 'Records' can be earned.
There's a slight difference between
present participles (ending in -ing) and
past participles (usually ending in -ed).
When an "-ing" modifier is placed after the thing that it's modifying with a comma in between, then it modifies the entire preceding clause. This is in line with your understanding.
On the other hand, "-ed" modifiers
usually only modify a single noun on the GMAT. If the -ed modifier comes before the thing it's modifying, then it modifies the subject. If the "-ed" modifier comes after the thing that it modifies, it usually modifies the closest noun.
So, is it a hard-and-fast
rule that "-ed" can never modify an entire clause? Well, I can't think of an OA that uses an "-ed" modifier to modify an entire clause (if anyone can think of one, let us know!). Does that mean that using an "-ed" modifier to modify a clause (i.e. "Tim paces back and forth, worried that he'll be blamed for his toddler's face tattoos.") is inherently wrong? I don't think so. That example with the face tattoos seems fine to me.
Overall, it's best not to stress over a "rule" that the GMAT may or may not violate at some point. Instead, ask yourself, "What does the "-ed" modifier seem to modify here? Does that make sense?" If so, leave it in the running and look for other decision points.
I hope that helps a bit!
This V-ed MOD issue has been confusing me so long.
Here is an example that V-ed modifies main subject instead of preceding noun.
for COMMA+V-ed, while that for COMMA+V-ing has.
But, as your recommendation, I agree that it is better to look for other decision points.