Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 20:35 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 20:35
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3 
User avatar
Schachfreizeit
User avatar
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Last visit: 02 Feb 2023
Posts: 110
Own Kudos:
8
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 110
Kudos: 8
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 02 Jan 2023, 06:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sivasanjeev
akhil911
Hi,

After going through these posts i am still not very clear about why A is incorrect.
Can someone explain in more detail about this.

In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives, strongly recommending middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise.

(A). strongly recommending middle-aged people to
Recommending is a verb-ing modifier. As a rule, verb-ing modifier after a comma, will modify the preceding clause (and either provides additional info about the preceding clause, or presents the result of the preceding clause. When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause.)
Ex: Researchers published the results of the experiment, winning the prestigious award.

In our case, sedentary lifestyles ... is NOT recommending..

(B). strongly recommending that middle-aged people should
Same issue as in A

(C). and strongly recommended for middle-aged people to
Many issues in C. Researchers concluded that ... recommended that.. would be a proper construction. "recommended for" is unidiomatic.

(D). and their strong recommendation was for middle-aged people to
"recommendation was for middle-aged people to..." is a wrong construction.

(E). and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people
Correct construction - Researchers concluded that sedentary... , and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people...
Notice the comma preceding 'and' - the comma + and construction joins the two independent clauses correctly.
Show more

Regarding A): why can't the comma-ing modifier modify the first clause "In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded"?

And can you explain the following: When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,767
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,767
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 02 Jan 2023, 06:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Schachfreizeit
sivasanjeev
akhil911
Hi,

After going through these posts i am still not very clear about why A is incorrect.
Can someone explain in more detail about this.

In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives, strongly recommending middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise.

(A). strongly recommending middle-aged people to
Recommending is a verb-ing modifier. As a rule, verb-ing modifier after a comma, will modify the preceding clause (and either provides additional info about the preceding clause, or presents the result of the preceding clause. When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause.)
Ex: Researchers published the results of the experiment, winning the prestigious award.

In our case, sedentary lifestyles ... is NOT recommending..

(B). strongly recommending that middle-aged people should
Same issue as in A

(C). and strongly recommended for middle-aged people to
Many issues in C. Researchers concluded that ... recommended that.. would be a proper construction. "recommended for" is unidiomatic.

(D). and their strong recommendation was for middle-aged people to
"recommendation was for middle-aged people to..." is a wrong construction.

(E). and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people
Correct construction - Researchers concluded that sedentary... , and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people...
Notice the comma preceding 'and' - the comma + and construction joins the two independent clauses correctly.

Regarding A): why can't the comma-ing modifier modify the first clause "In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded"?

And can you explain the following: When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause
Show more

Hello Schachfreizeit,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, here "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not an independent clause; rather, it is a dependent clause that only serves to modify the verb "concluded".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,767
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,767
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 02 Jan 2023, 06:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Schachfreizeit
Hello Schachfreizeit,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, here "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not an independent clause; rather, it is a dependent clause that only serves to modify the verb "concluded".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Show more


sorry, I still don't get it..[/quote]

Hello Schachfreizeit,

To clarify, what we mean is that "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not a separate phrase that can be modified by the present participle ("verb+ing") phrase "strongly recommending"; it is just a modifier that is part of the clause "medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded...".

Another way to look at it is that "sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" with "strongly recommending" produces an illogical meaning; this modification implies that the sedentary life-styles strongly recommend middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise; remember, in modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "recommending" in this case)" construction implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Schachfreizeit
User avatar
Joined: 17 Nov 2022
Last visit: 02 Feb 2023
Posts: 110
Own Kudos:
8
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 110
Kudos: 8
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 02 Jan 2023, 08:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5
Schachfreizeit
Hello Schachfreizeit,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, here "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not an independent clause; rather, it is a dependent clause that only serves to modify the verb "concluded".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team


sorry, I still don't get it..
Show more

Hello Schachfreizeit,

To clarify, what we mean is that "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not a separate phrase that can be modified by the present participle ("verb+ing") phrase "strongly recommending"; it is just a modifier that is part of the clause "medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded...".

Another way to look at it is that "sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" with "strongly recommending" produces an illogical meaning; this modification implies that the sedentary life-styles strongly recommend middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise; remember, in modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "recommending" in this case)" construction implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team[/quote]

that helps, thanks a lot!
I still have one question: Why can't the modifier refer back to "researcher"? it would make sense that they are recommending sth..
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,767
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,767
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 03 Jan 2023, 06:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Schachfreizeit
ExpertsGlobal5
Schachfreizeit
Hello Schachfreizeit,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, here "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not an independent clause; rather, it is a dependent clause that only serves to modify the verb "concluded".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team


sorry, I still don't get it..

Hello Schachfreizeit,

To clarify, what we mean is that "that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" is not a separate phrase that can be modified by the present participle ("verb+ing") phrase "strongly recommending"; it is just a modifier that is part of the clause "medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded...".

Another way to look at it is that "sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives" with "strongly recommending" produces an illogical meaning; this modification implies that the sedentary life-styles strongly recommend middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise; remember, in modifying a clause, the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "recommending" in this case)" construction implies that the subject of the clause took the action referred to by the participle.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Show more

that helps, thanks a lot!
I still have one question: Why can't the modifier refer back to "researcher"? it would make sense that they are recommending sth..[/quote]

Hello Schachfreizeit,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, yes; "recommending" can refer to "researchers" and convey a logical meaning; the options that use the "comma + present participle" construction are incorrect for other reasons.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,887
 [1]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,887
 [1]
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 03 Jan 2023, 16:30
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Schachfreizeit

Regarding A): why can't the comma-ing modifier modify the first clause "In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded"?

And can you explain the following: When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause
Show more



Hello Schachfreizeit,

I will be glad to help you with this one. :)

Per the rule, the comma + verb-ing modifier modifies the immediately, preceding clause. In this sentence, the clause that preceded the comma + verb-ing modifier "strongly recommending..." is "sedentary life-styles lead to...". It is clear that the comma + verb-ing modifier cannot logically modify the preceding action because the modifier action fails to logically connect with the subject of the modified action "sedentary life-styles" because these life-styles did not recommend anything.


Now, let's study the following official correct sentence:

According to scientists who monitored its path, an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, brightening the Northern Lights and possibly knocking out a communications satellite.

The two comma + verb-ing modifiers "brightening..." and "knocking out..." do NOT modify the immediately, preceding clause "that surrounds Earth". Why? Because it is a noun modifier that describes just a noun from the preceding clause. Therefore, the two comma + verb-ing modifiers can jump over this noun modifier clause and modify the proper clause "an expanding cloud... triggered a large storm...".


Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
77,001
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 77,001
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 00:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Schachfreizeit
sivasanjeev
akhil911
Hi,

After going through these posts i am still not very clear about why A is incorrect.
Can someone explain in more detail about this.

In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives, strongly recommending middle-aged people to undertake some form of regular exercise.

(A). strongly recommending middle-aged people to
Recommending is a verb-ing modifier. As a rule, verb-ing modifier after a comma, will modify the preceding clause (and either provides additional info about the preceding clause, or presents the result of the preceding clause. When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause.)
Ex: Researchers published the results of the experiment, winning the prestigious award.

In our case, sedentary lifestyles ... is NOT recommending..

(B). strongly recommending that middle-aged people should
Same issue as in A

(C). and strongly recommended for middle-aged people to
Many issues in C. Researchers concluded that ... recommended that.. would be a proper construction. "recommended for" is unidiomatic.

(D). and their strong recommendation was for middle-aged people to
"recommendation was for middle-aged people to..." is a wrong construction.

(E). and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people
Correct construction - Researchers concluded that sedentary... , and they strongly recommended that middle-aged people...
Notice the comma preceding 'and' - the comma + and construction joins the two independent clauses correctly.

Regarding A): why can't the comma-ing modifier modify the first clause "In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded"?

And can you explain the following: When it does so, it associates itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause
Show more

The 'comma + verb-ing' can refer to researchers but its use is not correct here.

Comma + verb-ing modifiers at the end of the sentences play one of the following two roles:

1.
They give us the result of an action that took place in the previous clause
e.g. The principal stepped on to the podium, silencing the students.
The action was of stepping on to the podium. Its impact was that the students became silent. The principal did not himself silence them.

2.
They explain how
e.g. He spent the last two months in Europe, drinking wine and eating cheese.
How did he spend the last two months? Drinking wine and eating cheese

Here the sentence is talking about two actions done by the researchers - concluded ... and recommended ...
Hence, we will not put 'recommended' as 'comma + verb-ing' modifier.
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 13:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Expert GMATNinja DmitryFarber AndrewN zhanbo ReedArnoldMPREP
- my issue with (c), (d) and (e) is the COMMA + AND.

When you have the structure -- Subject + Verb + Comma + and + Subject - Verb

Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be independent and unrelated to each other.

Clause 2 CANNOT be a consequence of Clause 1 per my understanding with the usage of Comma + AND between two clauses.

In this case of E --

Clause 2 is a consequence of Clause 1

hence i thought (c), (d) and (e) were wrong

**
Clause 1: medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives
Clause 2: they strongly recommended that middle-aged people undertake some form of regular exercise.
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 13:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Hi Expert GMATNinja DmitryFarber AndrewN zhanbo ReedArnoldMPREP
- my issue with (c), (d) and (e) is the COMMA + AND.

When you have the structure -- Subject + Verb + Comma + and + Subject - Verb

Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be independent and unrelated to each other.

Clause 2 CANNOT be a consequence of Clause 1 per my understanding with the usage of Comma + AND between two clauses.

In this case of E --

Clause 2 is a consequence of Clause 1

hence i thought (c), (d) and (e) were wrong

**
Clause 1: medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concluded that sedentary life-styles lead to heart and lung diseases that shorten lives
Clause 2: they strongly recommended that middle-aged people undertake some form of regular exercise.
Show more

You take the best of what you got. While 'so' would have more clearly linked the 'cause/effect' here, 'and' is perfectly acceptable.

Not sure where you picked up this rule:

Quote:
When you have the structure -- Subject + Verb + Comma + and + Subject - Verb

Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be independent and unrelated to each other.

Clause 2 CANNOT be a consequence of Clause 1 per my understanding with the usage of Comma + AND between two clauses.
Show more

But it's not one I'm familiar with.

I've seen in certain issues of parallelism that 'and' is less preferable to 'comma,--ing' modifiers to show 'cause effect,' but I've never seen a rule that the two clauses must be 'independent' and 'unrelated' to each other (something that definitely isn't the case... the reason they are in the same sentence is because they ARE related to each other in some way), and certainly, a second clause can be a consequent of the first clause.
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 15:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ReedArnoldMPREP

I've seen in certain issues of parallelism that 'and' is less preferable to 'comma,--ing' modifiers to show 'cause effect,' but I've never seen a rule that the two clauses must be 'independent' and 'unrelated' to each other (something that definitely isn't the case... the reason they are in the same sentence is because they ARE related to each other in some way), and certainly, a second clause can be a consequent of the first clause.
Show more

Hi ReedArnoldMPREP - you mention parallelism in the yellow.. I wasn't referring to parallelism whatsoever.

Instead, I was referring to Comma + AND in the context of FANBOYS [For, And, But, Or, Yet, So, Nor...)

I thought (c), (d), (e) -- Comma + AND is being used in the context of FANBOYS.

When you use FANBOYS -- Clause 1 and Clause 2, per my understanding CANT BE RELATED. Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be un-related.

For example - Clause 2 CANT be a consequence of Clause 1 if you use Comma +AND in the context of FANBOYS

Example - I killed 10 people, and I am in jail.

COMMA + FANBOY, implies I am in jail FOR SOME OTHER REASON (maybe I didnt pay my taxes or something)
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 16:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
ReedArnoldMPREP

I've seen in certain issues of parallelism that 'and' is less preferable to 'comma,--ing' modifiers to show 'cause effect,' but I've never seen a rule that the two clauses must be 'independent' and 'unrelated' to each other (something that definitely isn't the case... the reason they are in the same sentence is because they ARE related to each other in some way), and certainly, a second clause can be a consequent of the first clause.

Hi ReedArnoldMPREP - you mention parallelism in the yellow.. I wasn't referring to parallelism whatsoever.

Instead, I was referring to Comma + AND in the context of FANBOYS [For, And, But, Or, Yet, So, Nor...)

I thought (c), (d), (e) -- Comma + AND is being used in the context of FANBOYS.

When you use FANBOYS -- Clause 1 and Clause 2, per my understanding CANT BE RELATED. Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be un-related.

For example - Clause 2 CANT be a consequence of Clause 1 if you use Comma +AND in the context of FANBOYS

Example - I killed 10 people, and I am in jail.

COMMA + FANBOY, implies I am in jail FOR SOME OTHER REASON (maybe I didnt pay my taxes or something)
Show more

I know you weren't talking about parallelism, but that's the structure I've more commonly seen cause and effect more appropriately determined with a 'comma,--ing' modifier than with a conjunction 'and.'

This:

Quote:
When you use FANBOYS -- Clause 1 and Clause 2, per my understanding CANT BE RELATED. Clause 1 and Clause 2 have to be un-related.
Show more

is flatly wrong. Of course the two causes are related.

The sentence--

"The lightbulb was invented in the 1800s, and I had pasta for dinner."

Should raise eyebrows because it makes no sense. The conjunction links the structure and the ideas within them.

Quote:
For example - Clause 2 CANT be a consequence of Clause 1 if you use Comma +AND in the context of FANBOYS
Show more

This is, again, not a rule. Where have you seen this rule before?

I think there are conjunctions that much more clearly indicate cause and effect ('so,' for instance). And 'and' does not always indicate cause and effect. But it can be there.

"They had a huge argument, and she stormed out of the house."

In fact, due to some INCREDIBLE subtlety in meaning, I think that's more appropriate than "They had a huge argument, so she stormed out of the house."

Because the reason she stormed out wasn't *really* that they had the argument. She stormed out because she was mad about whatever the argument was about.

Similarly, one could argue about the GMAT question here, the reason researchers recommend people exercise is not because they CONCLUDED sedentary lifestyle leads to heart disease, it's because of the fact that sedentary lifestyle leads to heart disease.

That's getting far too subtle, though, and I see no reason why 'so' couldn't work in this particular sentence, but 'and' is perfectly fine. I don't know where you read that 'and' can *NEVER* show cause and effect between clauses, but it's a notion you need not remember.

And, mostly remember: you're picking the best sentence of five options, not the best sentence of all possible sentences. 'So' might have been better, but there's not a sentence with 'so.'
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 17:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ReedArnoldMPREP
Should raise eyebrows because it makes no sense. The conjunction links the structure and the ideas within them.

Quote:
For example - Clause 2 CANT be a consequence of Clause 1 if you use Comma +AND in the context of FANBOYS

This is, again, not a rule. Where have you seen this rule before?

I think there are conjunctions that much more clearly indicate cause and effect ('so,' for instance). And 'and' does not always indicate cause and effect. But it can be there.

"They had a huge argument, and she stormed out of the house."
Show more

ReedArnoldMPREP -
Hmm i think i may have figured out why I said the yellow

#1) JD had an argument with Jill and he stormed out

Parallelism is occurring In #1 – red is NOT the cause of blue. JD stormed out for some reason other than the argument

#2) JD had an argument with Jill, and he stormed out

FANBOY is seen in # 2 - I thought – in this case too – red is NOT the cause of the blue

Why?

Because we have OTHER WAYS to express causality

(#3) Conjunctive adverbs
JD had an argument with Jill; Thus, he stormed out

(#4) Present participle adjective
JD had an argument with Jill, storming out

(#3) and (#4) -- both imply the red IS THE CAUSE of the blue
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 05 Jan 2023, 20:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
ReedArnoldMPREP
Should raise eyebrows because it makes no sense. The conjunction links the structure and the ideas within them.

Quote:
For example - Clause 2 CANT be a consequence of Clause 1 if you use Comma +AND in the context of FANBOYS

This is, again, not a rule. Where have you seen this rule before?

I think there are conjunctions that much more clearly indicate cause and effect ('so,' for instance). And 'and' does not always indicate cause and effect. But it can be there.

"They had a huge argument, and she stormed out of the house."

ReedArnoldMPREP -
Hmm i think i may have figured out why I said the yellow

#1) JD had an argument with Jill and he stormed out

Parallelism is occurring In #1 – red is NOT the cause of blue. JD stormed out for some reason other than the argument

#2) JD had an argument with Jill, and he stormed out

FANBOY is seen in # 2 - I thought – in this case too – red is NOT the cause of the blue

Why?

Because we have OTHER WAYS to express causality

(#3) Conjunctive adverbs
JD had an argument with Jill; Thus, he stormed out

(#4) Present participle adjective
JD had an argument with Jill, storming out

(#3) and (#4) -- both imply the red IS THE CAUSE of the blue
Show more

Right. I think the takeaway is that 'and' often isn't ideal for cause/effect, but if it's the best option of the five, go ahead and choose it.
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 06 Jan 2023, 07:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Notes for JD (no need to respond) - summary based on email

Parallelism (AND) == x and y are distinct. x is not the cause of y.
Comma + And == X maybe the cause of Y or X may NOT be the cause of Y. We can say
Attachments

screenshot 10.jpg
screenshot 10.jpg [ 94.04 KiB | Viewed 985 times ]

User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 06 Jan 2023, 09:10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Notes for JD (no need to respond) - summary based on email

Parallelism (AND) == x and y are distinct. x is not the cause of y.
Comma + And == X maybe the cause of Y or X may NOT be the cause of Y. We can say
Show more

Yeah I think Avi's use of 'imply' is crucial, here. You were saying the use of "and" means the second clause CANNOT be a consequence of the first. It's more accurate to say "and" does not IMPLY the second is a consequence of a first, but human intuition might tell us it is. That is, cause/effect is POSSIBLE under 'and,' just not implied.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,831
Own Kudos:
986
 [1]
Posts: 18,831
Kudos: 986
 [1]
In 1984 medical researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities concl 07 Jan 2024, 04:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts