In keeping with her commitment to her Christian faith, Sojourner Truth

Hi perseverance2021,

1. Her being dedicated is somewhat awkward. For example, if we had to choose between (a) "He demonstrated his being interested in SC" and (b) "He demonstrated his interest in SC", we'd normally choose (b), the one with the noun interest, over (a), the one with the gerund being. Keep in mind that this is a relatively less reliable call, and that in some (other, different) cases, we may prefer gerunds over nouns.

2. It's hard to say. For what it's worth, I don't think the GMAT would want to force test takers to take that call.
_________________

Isnt Abolishing slavery a gerund? CAn gerund-a noun phrase- be parallel to a noun(emancipate woman)?
What type of a phrase "emancipate woman" is? IMO. woman is noun and emancipate is adjective modifying the noun . Is that correct?

When is it right to use gerund after "to"?

GMATGuruNY
oops! I thought it was to abolish vs to emancipate. Sorry for this silly question . I've still a query on this issue! What if the choice says:
(F) that she was dedicated both to abolish slavery nonviolently and to emancipate women
Does it make sense?
_________________

Can someone verify whether the construction is correct or not?

In keeping with her commitment to her Christian faith,
Sojourner Truth (was) demonstrated as a public speaker (Seems to me that Verb was missing)
a dedication both to the nonviolent abolition of slavery as well as for women to be emancipated. (Wont there be comma before a dedication)

As per your example, it was clear that verb is demonstrated.

However, in the question, it did not seem that Sojourner Truth is like Sojourner's Truth. when I read/infer the sentence, it feels like someone demonstrated Sojourner Truth as a speaker. That part created the confusion.

MartyTargetTestPrep

I would like to understand what is the issue with "she was dedicated ... to emancipate women"
emancipate means " to set free"

1. She was dedicated to set free women - I know this does not make sense.
2. She was dedicated to set women free ( What's the issue with is one)
3. She was dedicated to emancipating women ( She was dedicated to setting women free)

I want to understand what is the issue with Sentence 2.

Hi EducationAisle

Shouldn't "demonstrated" be mandatorily followed by "that" to stress upon what is being demonstrated, or is there no such rule?

Hi Marty,
why it doesn't make sense?
emancipate means set free; and dedicated means committed!
she was committed to set free women.
nothing seems illogical to me
or its a parallelism issue but we don't usually dig deep into the parallelism that one is to+gerund and the other is to+verb; both starts with preposition "to" and thats enough to make sure that structure is parallel.
Or should I start digging in future?
or its an ideom issue dedicated to emancipate is never acceptable?

Thanks for the explanation.
However, I am still not able to process this.
To+ verb not always depicts purpose.
If it does here, whats wrong with her purpose,
She was dedicated to (purpose) set free women.
May be she wants to set them free - and she is doing good for those women.

Posted from my mobile device

I'm a bit confused about the use of "a dedication to both...the emacipation of women" in this sentence as a whole.
Is it correct to say this phrase serves as an appositive that modifies for "a public speaker"?

ExpertsGlobal5 what do you mean? whats the difference b/w for the purpose of and to the cause of?

Hi AjiteshArun,

Noted that ''dedicated to'' should take noun or gerund, but ''to emancipate'' shows the intent of the verb ''dedicated, right?
It is wrong to use infinitive just because verb should take object not another verb?

Also in (B) Can we say that the nonviolent abolishing and women’s emancipation is parallel?

Thanks

Hi ashutosh_73,

1. To can be (a) a preposition or (b) an infinitive marker (it can also be an adverb, but we don't need to worry about that). A preposition takes either a noun or a gerund as its object, whereas to as an infinitive marker is followed by the plain form of a verb. The important thing to note here is that the to we see after dedicated is a preposition. This is why we don't use the plain form of a verb after to here. This to is not an infinitive marker.

2. We can make gerunds parallel to nouns, but this depends to a large extent on context. That is, we will need to think about the specific words we're looking at.

3. It seems you tried to take a call on to based on meaning. I'm not saying meaning is not important, but a lot of the information out there about meaning is just plain wrong. Meaning is not special, and it's not more important than everything else in SC. More directly, no matter how good an unidiomatic structure is at communicating the meaning that we want, it will never be correct. Here's one way to look at meaning:


_________________