Kushagra0108 wrote:
Hi @
egmat/
GMATNinjaI respect your time :please . So I have read all above posts before putting this post. Doubt is still not resolved :-D
In 1776 Adam Smith wrote that it is young people
having “the contempt of risk and the presumptuous hope of success” needed to found new businesses.
In this option- Having is verbing modifier (without comma) modifying YP.
Subject- Adam Smith,
Verb- Wrote
Subject- IT,
Verb- IS
Needed is verb-ed modifier modifying preceeding phrase...
So everything seems to be fine.
Why A over C then?Without the modifiers, choice (C) boils down to, "Adam Smith wrote that it is young people." Sure, we have a bunch of subject-verb pairs, but what is it about those young people? It makes more sense to say, "... that it is young people WHO {verb}." For example:
- "It is young people who destroy their eardrums by listening to nerdcore rap with headphones."
- "It is old people who do not understand why a smartphone is needed to hail a taxi."
These two examples are clearly standalone sentences. But if I just say, "It is young people.", then I haven't really told you anything. There's a subject and a verb, but we don't have a complete thought.
Also, if we want to modify "young people", why would we use "having" (an -ing modifier that can be used to modify the entire preceding clause) instead of "who have" (a noun modifier that MUST modify "young people")? That latter is much clearer.
Comparing (A) and (C) side by side, (C) has no advantages over (A), so (A) is the winner!
Thank you sir for the explanation.
So far we know that the 'ING' modifier modifies the entire preceding clause IF the ING modifier carries a COMMA before it. Unfortunately, there is NO comma before 'having'. Could you share your thought if I miss anything, please?