Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
25 Dec 2016, 22:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
KalyanVaddagiri
"The guild system both limited and encouraged experimentation in Renaissance" is a subordinate clause introduced by "that". This part is not a fragment.
The colon ":" introduces an explanation about or example of what has been stated before the colon. Here the part after colon explains how the guild system both limited and encouraged experimentation.[/quote]
Hi sayantanc2k,
Sorry, I still have difficulty in understanding the structure.
What I understood by your explanation is: Semicolon is used to give the explanation of the previous clause
1. Does the above sentence show the correct usage of the semicolon?
2. Does semicolon provide the explanation of previous clause or that of any word in that clause? (In the given sentence, Semicolon":" provides explanation of guild system experimentation)
3. If we consider
subject: "the guild system both limited and encouraged experimentation in Renaissance Italy"
explanation of the subject: " artisans who would have otherwise had no support were allowed to develop their craft"
a. I am not sure whether the explanation is just above clause or the below clause(till the end)
"artisans who would have otherwise had no support were allowed to develop their craft, yet, once under such a system, they were discouraged from challenging the existing power dynamics"
b. Where is the verb for the subject
Please help ![/quote]
1. ":" is called a colon, not a semicolon. Yes, the sentence correctly shows the usage of colon.
2. The part after colon provides further explanation for the part before colon (The part could be the whole clause OR a part of the clause, even a single word.)
3. a. The explanation is as follows:
Why does Micheaux contend that the guild system limited experimentation? - because "once under such a system, they were discouraged from challenging the existing power dynamics."
Why does Micheaux contend that the guild system encouraged experimentation? - because "artisans who would have otherwise had no support were allowed to develop their craft".
3 b. The verb for the first clause is "were allowed" (subject "artisans") and that of the second is "were discouraged" (subject "they").[/quote]
I knew that it is colon; semicolon is ";". I don't know where my mind was while writing the post. I did not realize even a single time that I was using the incorrect word.
Thanks for the wonderful explanation.
27 Dec 2016, 17:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Shouldn't "who otherwise would have had no support" in (A) be a non-essential modifier?
How is it correct without the above part set off by commas?
How is it correct without the above part set off by commas?
27 Dec 2016, 21:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
manhasnoname
"who otherwise would have had no support" modifies artisans.
As per the rule, if we set off a modifier by comma then sentence should make complete sense without that modifier because that is non-essential modifier.
Let's try the sentence without this sub-clause
Artisans were allowed to develop their craft, yet, once under such a system, they were discouraged from challenging the existing power dynamics.
In first sentence, term "artisans" is used in general, while, in the second sentence, "they" should refer to the artisans who otherwise would have had no support
however, "artisans" in the first sentence and "they" in the second sentence should refer to the same set of artisans
For instance--
The students who attended the class scored well in the exam - Correct
The students, who attended the class, scored well in the exam- Incorrect
because the set of the students in the second sentence is different from the first sentence. In the second sentence, students is used in general
The students scored well in the exam
Hope it helps..
+1 Kudos if you like the post
