Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 22:08 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 22:08
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 
User avatar
russ9
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Last visit: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 174
Own Kudos:
400
Given Kudos: 23
Posts: 174
Kudos: 400
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 29 May 2014, 22:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat

Prepositional phrase “in two letters”, the way it is placed in this sentence, modifies “the great eruption of Vesuvius”. But logically it should modify the verb “wrote the only eyewitness account”. Change in the placement of this modifier makes this incorrect sentence correct.

In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephewof Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

The opening modifier now correctly modifies the following clause.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more

Hi Shraddha,

I have a question regarding the statement above.

According to your other articles -- when you have a ,ing opening modifier, the first thing after the comma should make sense and go with the modifier.

The opening modifier starts with "in two letters to the historian..." -- how can the nephew be the correct thing to come after the comma. The nephew wasn't IN the two letters, he wrote them. Shouldn't it be something along the lines of -- "in two letters..., the writing stated...."?

Thanks!
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
 [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: 32,884
 [1]
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 02 Jun 2014, 10:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
russ9
egmat

Prepositional phrase “in two letters”, the way it is placed in this sentence, modifies “the great eruption of Vesuvius”. But logically it should modify the verb “wrote the only eyewitness account”. Change in the placement of this modifier makes this incorrect sentence correct.

In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephewof Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

The opening modifier now correctly modifies the following clause.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Shraddha,

I have a question regarding the statement above.

According to your other articles -- when you have a ,ing opening modifier, the first thing after the comma should make sense and go with the modifier.

The opening modifier starts with "in two letters to the historian..." -- how can the nephew be the correct thing to come after the comma. The nephew wasn't IN the two letters, he wrote them. Shouldn't it be something along the lines of -- "in two letters..., the writing stated...."?

Thanks!
Show more



Hi russ9,
Thank you for the post. :)

May I ask you to review the following explanation by Shraddha before we start the discussion?
noun-noun-modifier-vs-verb-ing-modifier-as-discussed-in-137569.html#p1148019


Let’s look at a few examples to understand the usage of verb-ing modifiers and prepositional phrases at the beginning of the sentence:

• Using the stick, Tom killed the snake.
What does the modifier ‘using the stick’ modify in the above sentence?

As explained in the above article, when a verb-ing modifier is placed at the beginning of the sentence, it modifies the subject of the sentence. It is because the verb-ing modifier denotes an action that needs to be done by someone. So, the subject of the sentence becomes the doer of this action.
In the above example, Tom used the stick to kill the snake. So, Tom is the doer of the action denoted by ‘using’.


• In 1945, World War II ended.
What does the modifier ‘in 1945’ modify in the above sentence?

In this example, ‘in 1945’ is a prepositional phrase. Prepositional phrases are very versatile modifiers and they can modify nouns as well as verbs. This modification depends upon the context of the sentence.
In the above sentence, the prepositional phrase ‘in 1945’ modifies the verb ‘ended’.


Now, coming to your question:
• In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

The modifier ‘in two letters to the historian Tacitus’ modifies the verb ‘wrote’ in the given sentence. It does not modify the subject.


TAKE AWAYS
1. Prepositional phrases can modify nouns as well as verbs.

2. Verb-ing modifier placed at the beginning of the sentence modifies the subject of the preceding clause.


Hope this helps! :)
Deepak
avatar
sushnata
avatar
Joined: 07 Sep 2013
Last visit: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
5
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Olin '17 (D)
GMAT 1: 740 Q51 V39
WE:Project Management (Manufacturing)
Schools: Olin '17 (D)
GMAT 1: 740 Q51 V39
Posts: 3
Kudos: 5
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 20 Jul 2014, 06:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mahendru1992


Hi I have some doubts regarding this question. Outnumbering is wrong but isn't this modifier presenting a result?
And in the example you gave The film, shot in a small town of Guthernberg, exceeded the expectations of the producers, doesn't exceeded modify the closest noun i.e Guthernberg? So how does this make sense? Guthernberg isn't responsible for exceeding the expectations of the producers, rather the film is responsible.
Please help.
Show more

"Exceeded" is not a modifier but the verb. "shot... Guthernberg" is the modifier. "The film" was modified.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
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: 32,884
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 22 Jul 2014, 12:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mahendru1992


Hi I have some doubts regarding this question. Outnumbering is wrong but isn't this modifier presenting a result?
And in the example you gave The film, shot in a small town of Guthernberg, exceeded the expectations of the producers, doesn't exceeded modify the closest noun i.e Guthernberg? So how does this make sense? Guthernberg isn't responsible for exceeding the expectations of the producers, rather the film is responsible.
Please help.
Show more

Hi mahendru1992,

You seem to be having trouble in identifying whether Verb-ED word is a simple Past Tense Verb or Verb-ED Modifier. This is a common confusion that many test takers have. We have written a detailed article to help the test takers understand when a Verb-ED word is acts a simple Past Tense Verb and when it acts as a Verb-ED Modifier. Please read the article by clicking on the link below:
ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
SJ
avatar
ajmotwani
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2014
Last visit: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 21 Aug 2014, 02:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Amazing concept!!
I am loving your articles
User avatar
mneeti
User avatar
Joined: 30 Oct 2011
Last visit: 15 Dec 2018
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
73
Given Kudos: 13
Posts: 24
Kudos: 73
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 29 Sep 2014, 21:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

Below is question no. 60 from OG 13:

The Olympic Games helped to keep peace among the pugnacious states of the Greek world in that a sacred truce was proclaimed during the festival's month.

A) world in that a sacred truce was proclaimed during the festival's month
B) world, proclaiming a sacred truce during the festival's month
C) world when they proclaimed a sacred truce for the festival month
D) world, for a sacred truce was proclaimed during the month of the festival
E) world by proclamation of a sacred truce that was for the month of the festival

I am trying to understand what's wrong with answer choice (B) so far Verb+ing modifier is concerned. I know that the answer choice is wrong because of the use of festival's month, but I don't get the reason given in OE for eliminating choice (B).

OE for choice (B): It is not clear who would be doing the proclaiming; a clause is preferable to a phrase here.

Per explanation given in the article above, The verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma has to modify the subject and the verb together.In (B) proclaiming clearly modifies the subject Olympic games + verb helped. There is no confusion about the the subject and verb, then why is it wrong so far verb+ing modifier is concerned?
User avatar
dojha00
User avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2015
Last visit: 21 Dec 2016
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 19
Posts: 7
Kudos: 5
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 08 Apr 2015, 06:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sarcastic
Hello egmat thanks again for such a beautiful article.
But I am getting confused after this in one OG problem
Emily Dickinson’s letters to Susan Huntington Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumbering her letters to anyone else.
A. Dickinson were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumbering

E. Dickinson, which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886, outnumber

Why A is not correct ?? if you can help with that (Magosh you tube solution says "outnumbering incorrectly modify 1886 with which i don't agree)
Show more

which were written over a period beginning a few years before Susan’s marriage to Emily’s brother and ending shortly before Emily’s death in 1886
is a non-essential information so it should start with ,[comma]which ..... ,

While in option A, It's written as an essential information.

According to the MG SC guide.

If I am wrong please correct!!
Thanks.
avatar
abhishek03050
avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2016
Last visit: 05 Aug 2018
Posts: 29
Own Kudos:
39
Given Kudos: 93
Posts: 29
Kudos: 39
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 22 Sep 2016, 05:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
That was a very useful post for < Verb-ed / Verb-ing >

Thanks....

egmat
Show Spoiler
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER

As discussed in our previous article named “Noun + Noun Modifiers: The most “versatile” modifiers” (https://gmatclub.com/forum/modification-by-noun-noun-modifiers-137292.html#p1112971), these modifiers can modify the preceding noun, a noun in the middle of the sentence, or the entire preceding clause. They share a commonality with Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma in that both these modifiers modify the preceding clause. They also act like Verb-ed modifiers when they modify the preceding noun.

Despite these similarities, Noun + Noun Modifiers remain distinct from Verb-ing and Verb-ed modifiers in their function and structure both. Let’s delve into these dissimilarities between Noun + Noun Modifiers and other modifiers.
So now we know that there are two modifiers that can refer to entire preceding clause:
1. Noun + Noun Modifiers
2. Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma.



Even though these modifiers perform similar job of modifying the preceding clause, they are quite different in the way they perform their jobs.
The difference between these two kinds of modifiers is that when the verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the preceding clause, it presents either additional information or the result of the preceding clause by associating itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma has to modify the subject and the verb together.

However, the noun + noun modifier has no such restriction. It can simply modify just about any aspect of the preceding clause, without being restricted to modify the subject and the verb. A noun + noun modifier can zoom into any entity in the preceding clause to modify it.
Another thing to notice here is that, when noun + noun modifier modifies the entire preceding clause, then it can present any kind of additional information about the preceding clause. This information can be the result, the reason, the HOW aspect, just about any information about the modified clause.
 

OFFICIAL EXAMPLE: GMAT Prep



So let’s first understand the meaning of the sentence. The sentence says that one automobile manufacturer has announced plans to increase the average fuel efficiency of its SUVs by 25% over the next five years. This increase will amount to roughly five miles per gallon and will represent the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost 20 years.

Now the way this sentence uses the verb-ing modifiers “amounting” and “resulting”, both preceded by comma, these modifiers seems to present the result of the preceding clause “One automobile manufacturer has announced plans…”. Here, both the modifiers are referring to the subject and the verb of the preceding main clause. Logically, this does not make sense because announcement of plans cannot amount to five miles per gallon. The act of mere announcement cannot even represent first significant change. Hence, the use of verb-ing modifiers is incorrect in this sentence.


Now let’s analyze the sentence with correct answer choice D:



In this sentence, verb-ing modifiers “amounting…” and “representing…” have replaced with noun + noun modifiers “an increase that would amount to…” and “(an increase) that would represent…”. Here,

an increase = noun
“that would amount…” and “that would represent…” = noun modifiers (relative pronoun clauses)

By converting the verb-ing modifiers into noun + noun modifier, we are able to rectify the modification error easily because now, unlike the verb-ing modifiers, the noun + noun modifier need not modify the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. It can easily zoon into “increase” to present more information about this aspect of the preceding clause. This is the beauty of such modifiers.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more
User avatar
gauravraos
User avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2016
Last visit: 24 Sep 2021
Posts: 89
Own Kudos:
538
Given Kudos: 76
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Operations
Schools: Rotman '19 NTU '18 HEC Montreal '20 XLRI GM"18 HKUST '19 (D) IIMB SMU '18 Schulich Sept 18 Intake Queen's 19 NUS '20 Simon '21 Madison '21 (M) ISB '20 (I) BYU'21 (A)
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
GPA: 4
WE:Engineering (Consulting)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Rotman '19 NTU '18 HEC Montreal '20 XLRI GM"18 HKUST '19 (D) IIMB SMU '18 Schulich Sept 18 Intake Queen's 19 NUS '20 Simon '21 Madison '21 (M) ISB '20 (I) BYU'21 (A)
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
Posts: 89
Kudos: 538
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 24 Apr 2017, 05:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks a lot egmat for simplifying the modifier concept
avatar
Keysersoze10
avatar
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Last visit: 10 Nov 2018
Posts: 7
Given Kudos: 47
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.9
WE:Information Technology (Finance: Investment Banking)
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
Posts: 7
Kudos: 0
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 23 Aug 2017, 00:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
Hi Soumen,

Prepositional phrases are very versatile modifiers. They modify nouns as well verbs. The modification of prepositional phrases depends upon the context of the sentence and hence their placement in the sentence.

Now let’s take the OG sentence to understand the modification of the prepositional phrase.

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

The sentence says that sometimes to save their clients, defense attorneys argue that their client committed the crime because of reaction of some food. If it is proved that the perpetrator is allergic to some food and he had ingested that before committing the crime, then the perpetrators are not held responsible for their misconduct.

The prepositional phrase “in attributing criminal… behavior” modifies the subject of the following clause “the perpetrators”. Why so? Because the prepositional phrase says “in attributing…”. This word “attributing…” denotes an action that needs to be done by someone. Hence, here we are dealing with a prepositional phrase that needs a does, a noun entity. So it modifies perpetrators. And this modification does not make sense because the perpetrators do not attribute the criminal behavior to some food allergy.

Let’s take another official sentence here:

The nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius in two letters to the historian Tacitus.

Prepositional phrase “in two letters”, the way it is placed in this sentence, modifies “the great eruption of Vesuvius”. But logically it should modify the verb “wrote the only eyewitness account”. Change in the placement of this modifier makes this incorrect sentence correct.

In two letters to the historian Tacitus, the nephew of Pliny the Elder wrote the only eyewitness account of the great eruption of Vesuvius.

The opening modifier now correctly modifies the following clause.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more


egmat - In one of your articles you have written that a verbing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the preceding clause, so going by that logic shouldnt - in attributing...modifier modify the preceding subject - Defense attorneys ?
avatar
thanhtam269
avatar
Joined: 23 Aug 2017
Last visit: 10 Sep 2017
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 9
Kudos: 10
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 23 Aug 2017, 01:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thank you so much for this useful information
User avatar
abhik1502
User avatar
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Last visit: 18 Mar 2022
Posts: 129
Own Kudos:
47
Given Kudos: 154
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 3.6
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
Posts: 129
Kudos: 47
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 13 Dec 2017, 22:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Payal,

THis was great and helpful article. It clearly distinguish between ing and noun modifier.

WOuld you pls share something similar for
1. Noun+Noun modifier Vs Verb-ed modifier
2. Verb-ed modifier Vs Verb-ing modifier
User avatar
abhik1502
User avatar
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Last visit: 18 Mar 2022
Posts: 129
Own Kudos:
47
Given Kudos: 154
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 3.6
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
Posts: 129
Kudos: 47
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 13 Dec 2017, 22:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In regards to my previous question about Verb-ing Vs Verb-ed modifier,

Verb-ing modifier without comma modified preceding noun+noun modifier.
Similarly Ver-ed modified always modifies preceding noun+noun modifier.

So how we should table decision about whether to user Verb-ing or Verb-ed modifier ?
User avatar
Sankalp92
User avatar
Joined: 05 Sep 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2018
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
35
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 13
Kudos: 35
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 28 Jan 2018, 10:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
Hi there,

One manufacturer has announced plans to increase the average fuel efficiency of its sport utility vehicles by 25 percent over the next five years, amounting to roughly five miles per gallon, and representing the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost two decades.

In this sentence, “amounting…” and “representing…” present the result of the preceding clause and not additional information because the action denoted by the two verb-ing modifiers present the aftermath of the logical referent of these modifiers. This logical referent is “increase the average fuel efficiency of its sport utility vehicles by 25 percent over the next five years”.

Also notice that these effects will be felt after the plan has been executed. Till now the automobile manufacturer has only made announcements. Also notice that due to the execution of this plan, the SUVs will start giving the mileage of five miles per gallon and will show the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost two decades. These events will happen only after the plan is executed. The execution of the plan will lead to these events presented by the verb-ing modifiers. Hence, we say that “amounting…” and “representing…” present the result pf the preceding clause.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more


hello egmat experts,

please resolve one of my doubt. in one of the egmat modifier videos it has been taught that verbing modifiers can also modify the "to verb" of the sentence, and in this post its has been told that verbing modifier modifies the subject and verb of the preceding clause. Here amounting can modify "to increase" as well. please share your views.
User avatar
Sankalp92
User avatar
Joined: 05 Sep 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2018
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
35
 [2]
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 13
Kudos: 35
 [2]
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 28 Jan 2018, 10:31
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER

As discussed in our previous article named “Noun + Noun Modifiers: The most “versatile” modifiers” (https://gmatclub.com/forum/modification- ... l#p1112971), these modifiers can modify the preceding noun, a noun in the middle of the sentence, or the entire preceding clause. They share a commonality with Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma in that both these modifiers modify the preceding clause. They also act like Verb-ed modifiers when they modify the preceding noun.

Despite these similarities, Noun + Noun Modifiers remain distinct from Verb-ing and Verb-ed modifiers in their function and structure both. Let’s delve into these dissimilarities between Noun + Noun Modifiers and other modifiers.
So now we know that there are two modifiers that can refer to entire preceding clause:
1. Noun + Noun Modifiers
2. Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma.



Even though these modifiers perform similar job of modifying the preceding clause, they are quite different in the way they perform their jobs.
The difference between these two kinds of modifiers is that when the verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the preceding clause, it presents either additional information or the result of the preceding clause by associating itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma has to modify the subject and the verb together.

However, the noun + noun modifier has no such restriction. It can simply modify just about any aspect of the preceding clause, without being restricted to modify the subject and the verb. A noun + noun modifier can zoom into any entity in the preceding clause to modify it.
Another thing to notice here is that, when noun + noun modifier modifies the entire preceding clause, then it can present any kind of additional information about the preceding clause. This information can be the result, the reason, the HOW aspect, just about any information about the modified clause.
 

OFFICIAL EXAMPLE: GMAT Prep



So let’s first understand the meaning of the sentence. The sentence says that one automobile manufacturer has announced plans to increase the average fuel efficiency of its SUVs by 25% over the next five years. This increase will amount to roughly five miles per gallon and will represent the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost 20 years.

Now the way this sentence uses the verb-ing modifiers “amounting” and “resulting”, both preceded by comma, these modifiers seems to present the result of the preceding clause “One automobile manufacturer has announced plans…”. Here, both the modifiers are referring to the subject and the verb of the preceding main clause. Logically, this does not make sense because announcement of plans cannot amount to five miles per gallon. The act of mere announcement cannot even represent first significant change. Hence, the use of verb-ing modifiers is incorrect in this sentence.


Now let’s analyze the sentence with correct answer choice D:



In this sentence, verb-ing modifiers “amounting…” and “representing…” have replaced with noun + noun modifiers “an increase that would amount to…” and “(an increase) that would represent…”. Here,

an increase = noun
“that would amount…” and “that would represent…” = noun modifiers (relative pronoun clauses)

By converting the verb-ing modifiers into noun + noun modifier, we are able to rectify the modification error easily because now, unlike the verb-ing modifiers, the noun + noun modifier need not modify the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. It can easily zoon into “increase” to present more information about this aspect of the preceding clause. This is the beauty of such modifiers.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more

hi shraddha,

please resolve one of my doubt. in one of the egmat modifier videos it has been taught that verbing modifiers can also modify the "to verb" of the sentence, and in this post its has been told that verbing modifier modifies the subject and verb of the preceding clause. Here amounting can modify "to increase" as well. please share your views.
User avatar
felixduan320
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2019
Last visit: 05 Jan 2020
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
5
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 9
Kudos: 5
 [1]
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 27 Oct 2019, 13:19
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER

As discussed in our previous article named “Noun + Noun Modifiers: The most “versatile” modifiers” (https://gmatclub.com/forum/modification- ... l#p1112971), these modifiers can modify the preceding noun, a noun in the middle of the sentence, or the entire preceding clause. They share a commonality with Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma in that both these modifiers modify the preceding clause. They also act like Verb-ed modifiers when they modify the preceding noun.

Despite these similarities, Noun + Noun Modifiers remain distinct from Verb-ing and Verb-ed modifiers in their function and structure both. Let’s delve into these dissimilarities between Noun + Noun Modifiers and other modifiers.
So now we know that there are two modifiers that can refer to entire preceding clause:
1. Noun + Noun Modifiers
2. Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma.



Even though these modifiers perform similar job of modifying the preceding clause, they are quite different in the way they perform their jobs.
The difference between these two kinds of modifiers is that when the verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the preceding clause, it presents either additional information or the result of the preceding clause by associating itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma has to modify the subject and the verb together.

However, the noun + noun modifier has no such restriction. It can simply modify just about any aspect of the preceding clause, without being restricted to modify the subject and the verb. A noun + noun modifier can zoom into any entity in the preceding clause to modify it.
Another thing to notice here is that, when noun + noun modifier modifies the entire preceding clause, then it can present any kind of additional information about the preceding clause. This information can be the result, the reason, the HOW aspect, just about any information about the modified clause.
 

OFFICIAL EXAMPLE: GMAT Prep



So let’s first understand the meaning of the sentence. The sentence says that one automobile manufacturer has announced plans to increase the average fuel efficiency of its SUVs by 25% over the next five years. This increase will amount to roughly five miles per gallon and will represent the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost 20 years.

Now the way this sentence uses the verb-ing modifiers “amounting” and “resulting”, both preceded by comma, these modifiers seems to present the result of the preceding clause “One automobile manufacturer has announced plans…”. Here, both the modifiers are referring to the subject and the verb of the preceding main clause. Logically, this does not make sense because announcement of plans cannot amount to five miles per gallon. The act of mere announcement cannot even represent first significant change. Hence, the use of verb-ing modifiers is incorrect in this sentence.


Now let’s analyze the sentence with correct answer choice D:



In this sentence, verb-ing modifiers “amounting…” and “representing…” have replaced with noun + noun modifiers “an increase that would amount to…” and “(an increase) that would represent…”. Here,

an increase = noun
“that would amount…” and “that would represent…” = noun modifiers (relative pronoun clauses)

By converting the verb-ing modifiers into noun + noun modifier, we are able to rectify the modification error easily because now, unlike the verb-ing modifiers, the noun + noun modifier need not modify the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. It can easily zoon into “increase” to present more information about this aspect of the preceding clause. This is the beauty of such modifiers.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more


Hello,
Thanks for the explanation. I did however come across a problem on the official guides that is a bit confusing. It seems to me that B and C below are correct uses for a noun +noun modifier, but the OG explanation says the phrase after the comma is a "appositive phrase" and therefore must have a noun as a clear antecedent. Would you mind elaborating? B and C, while having the wrong tense, seem to be correct examples of noun + noun modifier usage. Thanks.

The computer company has announced that it will purchase the color-printing division of a rival company for $950 million, which is part of a deal that will make it the largest manufacturer in the office color-printing market.


(A) million, which is part of a deal that will make

(B) million, a part of a deal that makes

(C) million, a part of a deal making

(D) million as a part of a deal to make

(E) million as part of a deal that will make
avatar
Gj1990
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2018
Last visit: 27 Jul 2021
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 13 Dec 2019, 22:57
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Based on your explaination on the verb+ing verb ,
Have a query regarding the ofiicial Guide question.

Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles Islands.

D) is indeed the correct answer .
D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on

Here too, the Fossils didn't volunatarily do the action of dating back , but someone else did.
Then why verbing modifier (making) makes sense here . shouldn't it be an action of dating back that makes the sloth the earliest known mammal and not the doer Fossils.,

Based on the concept you shared , how can we relate 'making of sloth the earliest mammal' action to FOSSILS (subject of the preceding clause).

It is actually the fact that fossils were dated back (which someone else did , biologists maybe) that make the sloth the earliest known mammal.

How do I use the concept here.
User avatar
bitorbyte
User avatar
Joined: 11 Jan 2020
Last visit: 30 Sep 2020
Posts: 22
Own Kudos:
20
Given Kudos: 33
Status:Future Ninja
Posts: 22
Kudos: 20
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 24 Mar 2020, 23:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks so much.

I have a confusion on this question:

Many financial experts believe that policy makers at the Federal Reserve, now viewing the economy as balanced between moderate growth and low inflation, are almost certain to leave interests rates unchanged for the foreseeable future.

How is 'viewing' ( comma-ing modifier) a noun modifier?
User avatar
awichal
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2020
Last visit: 23 Jun 2021
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 225
Posts: 13
Kudos: 2
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 05 May 2021, 21:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thank You, It was so easy to understand
User avatar
ekanshgoyal
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jan 2022
Last visit: 11 Nov 2025
Posts: 63
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 37
Location: India
Posts: 63
Kudos: 3
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER 28 Jun 2023, 04:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
NOUN + NOUN MODIFIER VS. VERB-ING MODIFIER

As discussed in our previous article named “Noun + Noun Modifiers: The most “versatile” modifiers” (https://gmatclub.com/forum/modification ... l#p1112971), these modifiers can modify the preceding noun, a noun in the middle of the sentence, or the entire preceding clause. They share a commonality with Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma in that both these modifiers modify the preceding clause. They also act like Verb-ed modifiers when they modify the preceding noun.

Despite these similarities, Noun + Noun Modifiers remain distinct from Verb-ing and Verb-ed modifiers in their function and structure both. Let’s delve into these dissimilarities between Noun + Noun Modifiers and other modifiers.
So now we know that there are two modifiers that can refer to entire preceding clause:
1. Noun + Noun Modifiers
2. Verb-ing modifiers preceded by a comma.



Even though these modifiers perform similar job of modifying the preceding clause, they are quite different in the way they perform their jobs.
The difference between these two kinds of modifiers is that when the verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma modifies the preceding clause, it presents either additional information or the result of the preceding clause by associating itself with the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. The verb-ing modifier preceded by a comma has to modify the subject and the verb together.

However, the noun + noun modifier has no such restriction. It can simply modify just about any aspect of the preceding clause, without being restricted to modify the subject and the verb. A noun + noun modifier can zoom into any entity in the preceding clause to modify it.
Another thing to notice here is that, when noun + noun modifier modifies the entire preceding clause, then it can present any kind of additional information about the preceding clause. This information can be the result, the reason, the HOW aspect, just about any information about the modified clause.
 

OFFICIAL EXAMPLE: GMAT Prep



So let’s first understand the meaning of the sentence. The sentence says that one automobile manufacturer has announced plans to increase the average fuel efficiency of its SUVs by 25% over the next five years. This increase will amount to roughly five miles per gallon and will represent the first significant change in the fuel efficiency of any class of passenger vehicle in almost 20 years.

Now the way this sentence uses the verb-ing modifiers “amounting” and “resulting”, both preceded by comma, these modifiers seems to present the result of the preceding clause “One automobile manufacturer has announced plans…”. Here, both the modifiers are referring to the subject and the verb of the preceding main clause. Logically, this does not make sense because announcement of plans cannot amount to five miles per gallon. The act of mere announcement cannot even represent first significant change. Hence, the use of verb-ing modifiers is incorrect in this sentence.


Now let’s analyze the sentence with correct answer choice D:



In this sentence, verb-ing modifiers “amounting…” and “representing…” have replaced with noun + noun modifiers “an increase that would amount to…” and “(an increase) that would represent…”. Here,

an increase = noun
“that would amount…” and “that would represent…” = noun modifiers (relative pronoun clauses)

By converting the verb-ing modifiers into noun + noun modifier, we are able to rectify the modification error easily because now, unlike the verb-ing modifiers, the noun + noun modifier need not modify the subject and the verb of the preceding clause. It can easily zoon into “increase” to present more information about this aspect of the preceding clause. This is the beauty of such modifiers.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more


Hi,
Can noun+noun modifier modify any entity other than noun like verbs, adjectives etc?
   1   2 
Moderator:
MBAACCOUNT2025
General GMAT Forum Moderator
444 posts