Hi ran787, not sure if you read my post just above yours.

B uses for thwarting, whereas to thwart is preferable when intent needs to be depicted.

Also, B uses a comma before since, distorting the meaning.
_________________

In this question if I am not wrong
1) I think choice B and c are both run on sentences, don't we need a FANBOY conjunction or
a ; with the last part of the sentence starting with has
2) While in choice E 1st part is a modifier, followed by a subordinate clause, connected with an independent clause with verb has and its subject in the beginning .
Thanks in advance

Hi Kunal, a run-on sentence is when two Independent clauses are connected by a comma. In both B and C, there is only one Independent clause:

Kudzu has overrun many houses and countless acres of roadside.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses run-on sentence, its application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

(A) that has grown rampantly in the southern United States since introducing it in the 1920s to thwart - we do not need -ly here
(B) that has grown rampantly in the southern United States, since it was introduced in the 1920s for thwarting - same as A
(C) that has grown rampant in the southern United States since it was introduced in the 1920s to thwart - good
(D) growing rampant in the southern United States since introducing it in the 1920s for thwarting - it was introduced to do some task - we need preposition to not for
(E) growing rampantly in the southern United States, since it was introduced in the 1920s to thwart - same as A

I go with C

I believe "rampant" and "rampantly" change the meaning of the clause, but ultimate have the same effect.
"An Asian vine that has grown rampant" --> An Asian vine has become rampant. --> The vine is everywhere.
"An Asian vine that has grown rampantly" --> An Asian vine that has spread rapidly. --> The vine is everywhere.

(A)
"since introducing it..." looks like the start of a non-finite clause, which means that what we might be saying is "[An Asian vine] has grown rampantly in the southern United States since [the Asian vine was] introducing it in the 1920s to thwart soil erosion". The subject of our non-finite clause become "An Asian vine".
If we knew with 100% certainty that "since" was being used as a preposition here, then I think this option would be fine. But because we can't know with 100% certainty, this option can be misinterpreted.
Thus, we can rule this out

(B)
The comma makes the sentence much more ambiguous. We know that the "since" clause is a subordinate of "An Asian vine" clause, but our readers may not. With the comma, the "since" clause could potentially be mistaken as a subordinate of the main "Kudzu" clause. We don't need commas for subordinate clauses, so we might as well leave this one out as it makes the sentence clearer.
We can rule this out

(C)
Nothing wrong here

(D)
Same problem with (A)
We can rule this out

(E)
Same problem with (B)
We can rule this out

Can anyone also shed light if this question also has a tad degree of Parallelism involved?

For instance, Option B and E, growing and thwart. Thwarting and grown.

I think there is a run on sentence in option B

An Asian vine that has grown rampantly in the southern United States =>"Asian vine"is the subject and "has" is a verb and it expresses a complete thought.
Since it was introduced in the 1920 for thwarting soil erosion => "it" is the subject which refers to Kudzu and "was" is the verb and it also expresses a complete thought.

Even if we consider "Since" as a dependent marker and 2nd clause as dependent clause. What is the intent of the OG Explanations "The adverbial Clause Since it was introduced in the 1920 should not be set off from has grown rampantly"



Experts Please help. GMATNinja

Hi Smitc007, we can't just selectively do cherry picking of words, to concoct an Independent clause. has is not the verb for Asian vine. has is the verb for that.

So, basically that has grown rampantly in the southern United States is the dependent clause in this sentence.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses run-on sentence, its application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

choice E has one error.
there is comma before "since...", so, "since..." clause now do not modifies the preceding clause, but the following clause. this is not logic.

choice B is wrong because of "thwarting".

"for doing" is a problematic. consider

this book is introduced for reading US history

this is correct. "this book" dose not perform "reading". someone do "reading".

so, choice B implies that "vine" do not do "thwarting" but somthing else do "thwarting". this is not logic.

"for doing" show purpose of preceding noun or preceding clause. "doing" refer to a general action not an action of a specific noun in the sentence
"to do" show purpose of the preceding clause and refer to the subject of the preceding clause.
I learn gmat to take an MBA. "to take " refers to "I", and show a future action. I will perform "to take". I will take, not someone else .

normally , on gmat, for doing after the main clause is wrong. this pattern is normally correct when the clause is passive. but we have to know the above meaning analise.
pls, comment. am I correct ?

As EducationAisle notes, there's no run-on in (B), because "that has grown rampantly in the southern United States" isn't independent - it's a modifier describing the Asian vine. Take a simple example: "Dan, who runs a mile in fifteen minutes, is not a great athlete." Here we do have two clauses, but the one in red functions as a modifier, and so it's not independent. In the OG question, "that has grown" is part of a modifier describing the vine. If there's only one independent clause, we don't have a run-on.

There are two ways to understand the OG's point. First, if we have a long modifier, and within this modifier we get additional information about when an action takes place, we typically won't use a comma between action and time-modifier.

For example, "My child, who has been screaming since she awoke at 3AM, supposedly has many positive qualities." Notice that the blue component is one long modifier describing "my child," and there's no need, within the modifier, to separate the action ("has been screaming") from the description of when the action takes place ("since she awoke"). Similarly, in (C) "that has grown rampant in the southern United States since it was introduced in the 1920s to thwart soil erosion" is one long essential modifier describing the "Asian vine." "Since it was introduced" tells us when the rampant growth started.

Second, the word "since" is tricky because it has two meanings. In both the official question and in my example above, it means "from the time when." But it can also mean "because."

Watch what happens if I insert a comma before "since" in the previous example: "...who has been screaming, since she awoke at 3AM." Now it sounds as though the kid has been screaming because she awoke at 3AM, rather than indicating the timeframe of her meltdown. The same thing happens in (B): "that has grown rampantly in the southern United States, since it was introduced in the 1920s." The growth happened because it was introduced in the 1920's? It makes sense to say that the 1920's marks the time when growth became rampant; it makes less sense to claim that the plant has grown wildly because it was introduced in this decade. So the version without the comma is more logical.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Is this correct- " Kuduzu, an Asian vine growing rampant in the southern United States since it was introduced in the 1920s to thwart soil erosion, has over-run many houses and countless acres of roadside." ?

daagh can you please explain the usage of rampant and rampantly? Also, the comma before since option E?

Posted from my mobile device

Please email me the book , DM u already

Posted from my mobile device

Hello RJ7X0DefiningMyX,

I am not sure if your doubt still persists. Here is the reply nonetheless.

rampant - this word is an adjective and is used to modify noun entities.

rampantly - this word is an adverb that is used to modify actions and adjectives.


However, in this official sentence, the distinction does not quite stane because the sentence seems to suggest that growing rampantly has become a feature of Kudzu.


Now, in choice E, the comma before since works as the closing comma for the modifier an Asian vine growing rampantly in the southern United States. The structure has an impact on the meaning conveyed as follows:

Per Choice A, Kudzu has grown rampant since it was introduced in the 1920s.

Per Choice E, Kudzu has overrun many houses and countless acres of roadside since it was introduced in the 1920s.



Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

Hi Charles,
what if one doesn't know the meaning of the word. (Like me, until now)
How should I have approached this question?

I misconstrued (C) as the Kudzu has grown some XYZ in the southern US... and thus I crossed it off, so I chose (A)

According to the OG explanation: "since the sentence DOES NOT indicate who introduced the vine to the region, passive construction, i.e. in (C), is correct".

Anyway, was that the only split left?

I would still stick to my former question... (the meaning of the word)
Thnaks!

Hey GMATNinja, I believe there is an error in the second sentence you used for description. You have described "rampantly" as adjective and also by using the same sentence as the first one. Please rectify.
_________________

A is incorrect because 'since introducing it' is wrong
B says 'since it was introduced....for thwarting'... introduced to thwart would be the correct construction
C says ' since it was introduced in 1920 to thwart...' perfect construction...Also, 'that has grown rampant' is the correct construction here....similar to 'it has become perfect', 'he has become smart' etc...we don't need a modifier for the verb ' grown' we need the modifier for the noun 'vine' which is the adjective 'rampant'
D says ' growing rampant' ...tense is incorrect and 'for thwarting' is also incorrect
E is incorrect again for the tense ' growing rampantly'
Hence C

Posted from my mobile device

Fixed. Thank you for bringing that to our attention!
_________________