By skimming along the top of the atmosphere a proposed new style of a

Hi imSKR,

I don't think that a due to is a particularly good idea there (a new style of aircraft... could fly is a clause). That said, I don't treat this as an absolute.

There are other issues in this new version of option D, and that means that option A remains the best option, the one that we should mark.
_________________

Got it correct but got worried about the last modifier in (A) "according to its proponent", its not a dangling modifier, is this correct?

Hello, lakshya14. No, according to its proponents is not a dangling modifier, since it is a phrase that comments on the preceding clause more as an aside and could really fit into the sentence in various places. The skimming phrase, on the other hand, must modify the aircraft itself, or that would indeed pose a problem. All of the following are reasonable variations of the original sentence:

Original: A) By skimming along the top of the atmosphere, a proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours, according to its proponents.

Variant #1: According to its proponents, a proposed new style of aircraft could, by skimming along the top of the atmosphere, fly between most points on Earth in under two hours.

Variant #2: A proposed new style of aircraft, according to its proponents, could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours by skimming along the top of the atmosphere.

Variant #3: By skimming along the top of the atmosphere, a proposed new style of aircraft, according to its proponents, could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours.

I hope this exercise illustrates that it is important to consider the nature of the modifier before you make a determination as to what it, or the sentence as a whole, means to convey. Thank you for thinking to ask me about this one.

- Andrew
_________________

GMATNinja

How can A be correct? It is not the proposed new style of aircraft that is skimming along the top of the atmosphere, but rather it is the aircraft itself. Can you please explain your thought process?

Hi AjiteshArun AndrewN GMATRockstar BrightOutlookJenn



A general query on because <preposition> <noun> <verb+ing>
Is this type of construction usually wrong in GMAT?

Example:
1. Because of Ram joining the match … --> WRONG?
2. Because of Sam winning a high score … --> WRONG?


I learnt it from here

Similar construction is in this question because of +ing

please share your thoughts AjiteshArun AndrewN GMATRockstar BrightOutlookJenn

Hello, mSKR. Yes, I would disfavor the because of + -ing construct. Either of the two sentences you wrote above could be improved by converting the prepositional phrase into a verb instead:

1. Because Ram joined the match...

2. Because Sam [earned?] a high score...

The new sentences are much easier to follow, perfectly in keeping with a preferred answer on the GMAT™.

I hope that helps with your query. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
_________________

Hi mSKR

Thanks for the tag. You asked



Here's how I would think about this. "Because of" needs to be followed by a noun. If the idea we are trying to express is actually more complicated than just a noun, don't use "because of" (or "due to"). Instead, switch to "because" (without "of") or a different construction that allows us to have a real subject and real verb.

Example:
1. Prices have increased because of inflation. => Fine: "inflation" is just a noun
2. Prices have increased because of Congress' passing a law requiring businesses to assume liability for customer injuries. =>OMG, no! Dead on arrival. Someone actually DID SOMETHING so let's get a real conjugated verb to express the action.

2: New and improved: Prices have increased because Congress passed a law requiring businesses to assume liability for customer injuries.

3. Because of executives believing that layoffs save money, personnel reduction was the most popular choice in a recent survey of cost-cutting measures in Fortune 500 companies.
=> Yikes. "Because of executives believing"?? Oh dear. Let's cut the crap and get a real verb:

3: New and improved: Because executives believe that layoffs save money, ...

Does this help? Let us know!
_________________

Hi mSKR,

To add to the responses you've already received: try not to think of because of as "because + preposition". That is, don't look at it as a combination of because (a conjunction) and of (a preposition). Instead, consider because of (the whole thing) as a (multi-word) preposition, different from because.
_________________

Notice that in every answer choice, we have the verb "could fly" paired up with the subject "a proposed new style of aircraft" (in choice B, the pronoun "it" refers to "a proposed new style of aircraft"). "Style" is the main subject, and the rest of the phrase ("a proposed new" and "of aircraft") modifies that subject.

In EVERY answer choice, it's not the aircraft that could fly -- instead, it's technically the style (of aircraft). And since it's the style that's technically doing the flying, it makes sense that the style is also doing the skimming.

This sort of thing comes up all the time when we are talking about the type of something. For example:

"A new type of rubber can withstand temperatures of up to 400 degrees Fahrenheit." - Yes, we are talking about rubber, but "type" is technically the subject and thus the thing that can withstand the temperatures.

It's the same with "a style of [X]..." - The "style" is technically the subject, and it's the thing doing whatever action follows.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Hey, someone said english is an end-weighted language. Thats why I chose E. According to its proponents needs to be first. Bad, bad, bad sentence.

Posted from my mobile device

AndrewN can u give your analysis for why option D & E incorrect

How can we make sure that it's not the "Proponents" that is being modified by the modifier starting with "Skimming"?

[quote="generis"]By skimming along the top of the atmosphere, a proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours, according to its proponents.

A) By skimming along the top of the atmosphere, a proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours, according to its proponents.

B) By skimming along the top of the atmosphere, proponents of a proposed new style of aircraft say it could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours.

C) A proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours, according to its proponents, with it skimming along the top of the atmosphere.

D) A proposed new style of aircraft, say its proponents, could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours because of its skimming along the top of the atmosphere.

E) According to its proponents, skimming along the top of the atmosphere makes it possible that a proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours.

CHOICE C
"with it skimming..." should be touch the main clause so that this phrase can show a circumstance of the main action/verb. "acoording to its proponent" should be placed outside. this is at least inferior. "it" in "it skimming" is good because "its" in "its proponent" is good.

When analyzing modifiers, ask yourself two questions:

1) Given the structure of the answer choice, what is being modified?
2) Does it actually make sense to modify that thing in that way?

When -ing modifiers appear at the beginning of a sentence, it modifies the clause that follows. Specifically, it has to work with the subject of that clause (for more on -ing words, check out this article).

With that in mind, take a look at answer choice (B):

Let's start with question #1: given the structure of the answer choice, what is being modified? The way that this sentence is structured, the "proponents" are being modified by the -ing modifier at the beginning of the sentence.

Now, here's question #2: does it actually make sense to modify that thing in that way?

A "proponent" of a certain style of aircraft must be a human being -- nothing else would be arguing for or against a certain kind of aircraft. So, can a human being skim along the top of the atmosphere, as implied by that opening modifier?

Definitely not. The GMAT is quite literal about the meaning of SC sentences, and it makes no sense for a person to be skimming along the top of the atmosphere.

(B) is out because the modifier doesn't make any sense.

Here's (A) again:

This makes way more sense -- "a proposed new style of aircraft" is the thing that is "skimming along the top of the atmosphere."

I hope that helps!
_________________

GMATCoachBen Please could you tell why option C is incorrect? I see "with modifier" is used as an action modifier and it aptly tells how in option C it the action "fly" is getting modified

Hello Experts,

Whats wrong with D and E?
just eliminated them because of poor construction!
Is D wrong beacause "say its proponents" is enclosed within commas? (verb is closed and has no subject)
Whats the exact reason?

What about E
I don't see any pronoun issue "it's" can take logical antecedent-aircraft.
Is there any vital rule that 2 pronouns can't have 1 antecedent?

In (D), the subject of "say" is "proponents." So, the structure and use of that parenthetical clause are fine.

The biggest issue in (D) is that there is a poor connection between the aircraft's "skimming" and the fact that the aircraft "could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours."

Notice that (D) does not make clear that the aircraft would "fly between most points on Earth in under two hours" by "skimming." Rather, it makes the less clear point that, somehow, "because of its skimming," the aircraft "would fly between most points on Earth in under two hours" without clearly connecting the skimming to the rapidity of the flying.

Also, notice the use of "could" in (D), which magnifies the meaning issue. Because (D) uses "could" it communicates that "because of its skimming," the aircraft "could," or may possibly "fly between most points on Earth in under two hours." So, the skimming somehow causes a possibility.


The use of "its" in (E) is not ideal. Though we can tell what the sentence is meant to communicate, since "skimming" closely follows "its" and "aircraft" is far from "its," the sentence seems to be saying "According to (skimming's) proponents.

At the same time, an even more significant issue with (E) is that it communicates that "skimming along the top of the atmosphere" makes a fact possible.

Notice that (E) does not say that the "skimming" is done by the "proposed new style of aircraft." Rather it seems to convey that skimming in general makes possible the fact "that a proposed new style of aircraft could fly between most points on Earth in under two hours."

So, the meaning conveyed by (E) is ridiculous.
_________________

You are right when you say "with modifier" is used as an action modifier, but option (A) here is better. Why? Because, A conveys the intended meaning more precisely here. The intended meaning (As conveyed by the all the other answer choices, almost) is, proponents say that the new Aircraft could fly by skimming over the atmosphere. Here, this connection between the flying and skimming is crucial and better conveyed by the usage of "by skimming". You should check AndrewN 's explanation above that mentions this exact point.
It's fine to use "with + noun + participle" if you want to paint the action happening in the preceding clause. And as you rightly pointed out, it could well be justified here. But, the meaning gets distorted. By placing the skimming the atmosphere part in "with modifier", we take away that connection between "flying and skimming" that the proponents want to establish.
You use "with modifier" is these cases: 1. Tourists saw the lion resting in his den, with their eyes wide open. 2. The king entered the palace hall, with the cries of joy filling the court house.
AndrewN would you kindly share your two cents on the correct usage of "with + noun + participle" or "with modifier" ?

A fine writeup on the with phrase, MissBong. I will confess that in my own approach to SC questions, believe it or not, I aim not to tell a with phrase what it needs to do. I simply look to contextual clues to assess whether a given option can fall by the wayside for any reason. And, to ensure that I grasp how such a phrase may function correctly, I take note of official questions in which the construct appears in the correct answer. I will spoil just a few from different editions of the OG, but take a look at the following four questions and learn what you can from them, regarding with:

1) In a speech before the Senate Banking Committee...

2) Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms...

3) The tourism commission has conducted surveys...

4) Visitors to the park have often looked up...

Happy solving. Thank you for bringing me back into the dialogue here.

- Andrew
_________________