In preparation for the prediction of a major earthquake that will hit

Hello, TorGmatGod. I would say that neither proposal fixes the issue. The reader is still anticipating an answer after the comma to who or what was preparing for an earthquake, and a computer network does not logically fit to that end when an actor or participant later appears—the Office of Emergency Services should be mentioned after the comma for clarity. By way of comparison, how might you anticipate either sample sentence continuing below?

1) In preparing a home-cooked meal, _______

2) To prepare a home-cooked meal, _______

It would certainly be jarring within the confines of this exam to encounter something about, say, food, an oven, or a mixing bowl in the blank, rather than the person doing the preparation. (In real life, I could see an understood you serving as the actor, as in, To prepare... [you] set the oven to 350 degrees F.) Remember, the goal in SC is not to figure out what could be correct, but to play it safe and pursue the least debatable answer. More difficult questions are especially adept at getting test-takers to question whether an unfamiliar construct may be better than something that is perfectly functional.

- Andrew

Hi Experts,

Are the opening prepositional phrases in all the options modifying the noun (subject) immediately after the comma or the main clause?

In option D, is the modifier "hitting the state" based in the same time frame as the verb in the main clause?

Thanks
Kitty

KittyDoodles


No, these modifiers are all adverbial, so they modify the whole clause or action that follows. For instance, if I say "To prepare for her job interview, Sari practiced with her friends," that initial modifier is not referring to Sari. She herself isn't something used/intended to prepare. Rather, the modifier explains what she did in order to prepare. So the subject and modifier have to make sense together, but the modifier doesn't apply directly to the subject.

As for "hitting," keep in mind that -ing words aren't actually verbs, so they don't typically have their own tense. I can say "I am hitting," "I was hitting," "I will be hitting," "I will have been hitting," etc. In D, however, "hitting" isn't even part of a verb phrase--it's modifying "earthquake," so that "hitting" will happen whenever the earthquake occurs. It's only predicted, so it may not happen at all, and it doesn't make sense to place it at the same time as the preparation.

Actually, both.

The initial modifiers describe the whole action of the following clause.

In addition, whenever an initial modifier has a form that's derived from a verb, the immediately following subject should be the agent (same basic idea as 'subject', but i'm using 'agent' for action-words that aren't actually verbs) of that action. E.g., an initial modifier built around "to prepare" or "preparing" needs to be followed by whoever is preparing for something.
In this case, that's "the California Office of Emergency Services", the entity that is taking steps to prepare for future disasters. (The computer network itself is not taking preparatory actions, so A and D can be eliminated on that basis.)

Hi GMATGuruNY - my question is on (A) and (D)

(A) and (D) certainly have multiple issues but I only wanted to focus on issue of Initial modifier

Can I eliminate (A) and (D) because of the presence of a satellite-based computer network after the modifier in the red ?

Per my understanding, we cannot



Reason -

If the opening modifier is a VERB'ING modifier - then, yes the subject should follow right after

examples


But not necessarily, if the opening modifier is a preposition

example -


Both (#3) and (#4) are accurate per my understanding.

In preparation for a major earthquake, a satellite-based computer network is being built by the California Office of Emergency Services.
In preparation for a major earthquake, the California Office of Emergency Services is building a satellite-based computer network.
Here, in preparation is an adverb modifying the verb in the following clause.
As a result, a reader will assume that the SUBJECT of the following verb is acting IN PREPARATION for the earthquake.
Since it is THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE that is acting IN PREPARATION, the green sentence is clearly superior to the red sentence.
For this reason, I would be highly skeptical of option A in the SC at hand.

A similar line of reasoning can be applied to D.

To prepare for a major earthquake, a satellite-based computer network is being built by the California Office of Emergency Services.
To prepare for a major earthquake, the California Office of Emergency Services is building a satellite-based computer network.
Here, to prepare is an adverb modifying the verb in the following clause.
As a result, a reader will assume that the SUBJECT of the following verb is trying TO PREPARE for the earthquake.
Since it is THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE that is trying TO PREPARE, the green sentence is clearly superior to the red sentence.
For this reason, I would be highly skeptical of option D in the SC at hand.



In (4), to serves not as a preposition but as part of a VERB FORM: to prepare.
As discussed in my explanation above:
When a sentence begins with an infinitive, the agent of the infinitive should generally be the subject of the following clause.
Thus, (3) is clearly superior to (4).

I was between B and C and I did not know which was correct between "to identify" and " that will identify" but I you pay attention to the first part of B and C, b says "in preparing for the prediction" and C says "in preparing for a major earthquake. Preparing for the prediction, makes no sense, so I choose C

i choose c as option and my option was 2nd choice was e

In preparing for a major earthquake that is predicted to hit the state, the California Office of Emergency Services is building a satellite-based computer network to identify?

I got the right answer. but still, some thoughts wondering in my mind
First doubt:
The California Office is preparing for a major earthquake that is predicted to hit the state
This is not weird, Office is preparing something...( office is doing the action of preparation...)
second doubt:
If we remove the In from the Options. Does it still makes sense? or change the meaning of the sentence?
Why do we need IN actually? I have seen some OG questions related IN+v-ing Modifier. but still doesn't make sense.

DEAR VERBAL Experts, can you shed some light on my doubts?

dear DmitryFarber,

"hitting" is modifying earthquake, and implies same timeframe as earthquake , if earthquake will happen in the future, then "hitting" will too. so I think "hitting" is ok. would you please clarify where my problem ?

GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, MartyTargetTestPrep, AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian,
KarishmaB
avigutman, MartyTargetTestPrep ,

thinks in advance.