Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
14 May 2019, 07:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
I am trying to understand an explanation from MGMAT SC.
The CEO declared that everyone had to work every day through the holidays to make the production deadline, but in calling for such an extreme measure, the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
Explanation:
"but in calling for such an extreme measure" is a "comma-ing" modifier. Thus it will modify the entire clause to which it is attached to. wiz.
The CEO declared that everyone had to work every day through the holidays to make the production deadline
Logically, the CEO called for this extreme measure, not the employees. However, because the -ing modifier falls after the conjunction connecting the two clauses, the modifier refers to the employees, not to the CEO.
Can someone please explain me how "refers to the employees, not to the CEO" was derived?
My thoughts:
* Since it's an adverbial modifier. It should refer to anything but noun. How can it refer to CEO or Employees?
* THAT resets a sentence. Perhaps that's why it is referring to the "everyone had to ... deadline"
Subject - verb - that - subject - verb - object
Correct answer given are:
* In an extreme measure, the CEO declared that everyone had to work everyday through the holidays to make the production deadline; her employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
* The CEO declared that everyone had to woork everyday through the holidays to make the production deadline, but in calling for such an extreme measure, she upset her employees to the point of mutiny.
"Both of the correct sentences properly attribute the extreme move to the CEO, not to the employees"
The CEO declared that everyone had to work every day through the holidays to make the production deadline, but in calling for such an extreme measure, the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
Explanation:
"but in calling for such an extreme measure" is a "comma-ing" modifier. Thus it will modify the entire clause to which it is attached to. wiz.
The CEO declared that everyone had to work every day through the holidays to make the production deadline
Logically, the CEO called for this extreme measure, not the employees. However, because the -ing modifier falls after the conjunction connecting the two clauses, the modifier refers to the employees, not to the CEO.
Can someone please explain me how "refers to the employees, not to the CEO" was derived?
My thoughts:
* Since it's an adverbial modifier. It should refer to anything but noun. How can it refer to CEO or Employees?
* THAT resets a sentence. Perhaps that's why it is referring to the "everyone had to ... deadline"
Subject - verb - that - subject - verb - object
Correct answer given are:
* In an extreme measure, the CEO declared that everyone had to work everyday through the holidays to make the production deadline; her employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
* The CEO declared that everyone had to woork everyday through the holidays to make the production deadline, but in calling for such an extreme measure, she upset her employees to the point of mutiny.
"Both of the correct sentences properly attribute the extreme move to the CEO, not to the employees"
14 May 2019, 13:09
Kudos
Bookmarks
Independent clause 1: The CEO declared that everyone had to work every day through the holidays to make the production deadline
Conjunction: but
modifier of independent clause 2: but in calling for such an extreme measure, [this part incorrectly refers to "the company's employees".*]
Independent clause 2: the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
Each independent clause has to make sense on its own. Does this sentence make any sense: "But in calling for such an extreme measure, the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny?" No, because "But in calling for such an extreme measure" part refers to CEU that is in independent clause 1, not employees.
To learn more about ing modifiers, check here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/verb-ed-modi ... 25611.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/verb-ing-mod ... 35567.html
Hope this helps!
Conjunction: but
modifier of independent clause 2: but in calling for such an extreme measure, [this part incorrectly refers to "the company's employees".*]
Independent clause 2: the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny.
Each independent clause has to make sense on its own. Does this sentence make any sense: "But in calling for such an extreme measure, the company's employees were upset to the point of mutiny?" No, because "But in calling for such an extreme measure" part refers to CEU that is in independent clause 1, not employees.
To learn more about ing modifiers, check here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/verb-ed-modi ... 25611.html
https://gmatclub.com/forum/verb-ing-mod ... 35567.html
Hope this helps!
