Last visit was: 09 Jul 2025, 14:44 It is currently 09 Jul 2025, 14:44
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
 [235]
112
Kudos
Add Kudos
123
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
SOURH7WK
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Last visit: 03 Aug 2022
Posts: 241
Own Kudos:
1,242
 [7]
Given Kudos: 50
Concentration: Marketing
 Q47  V26 GMAT 2: 540  Q45  V19 GMAT 3: 580  Q48  V23
GPA: 3.2
WE 1: 7 Yrs in Automobile (Commercial Vehicle industry)
Products:
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
srikirs007
Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Last visit: 13 May 2015
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
42
 [3]
Given Kudos: 219
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Leadership
GPA: 3.7
WE:Engineering (Other)
Posts: 28
Kudos: 42
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
32,345
 [14]
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
 [14]
12
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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
User avatar
BukrsGmat
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Last visit: 24 Jul 2013
Posts: 118
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 103
Posts: 118
Kudos: 1,101
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Just Brilliant Sraddaha!!!!

As previous posted I have also doubt regarding Verb-ing working as result.
When Verb-ing is showing the result of previous clause should it also modify the the subject of the previous clause...or if the it is modifying the clause then it should modify the subject.

Is the below sentence correct:

One manufacturer took steps to increase the average fuel efficiency of its sport utility vehicles by 25 percent over the next five years, resulting roughly five miles per gallon gain.


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
Also i believe that as it is planned not yet done can we say in the above statement V1-ing is the result. I believe it is just modifying the previous clause.
User avatar
thangvietname
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Last visit: 28 Jun 2017
Posts: 525
Own Kudos:
548
 [1]
Given Kudos: 916
Posts: 525
Kudos: 548
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Great. Thank you e gmat experts.

I think NOUN+NOUN MOFIFIER can mofify
1. a verb in the preceding clause as in the above example.
or
2. the total preceding clause ( I like her, a thing most persons know)

the takeaway is that NOUN+NOUN MODIFIER dose not need to associate with the subject and main verb of the preceding clause. Verb-ing dose need.

I think there are only 2 cases in which NOUN+NOUN MODIFIER WORKS. Is there any 3rd case ?

pls, comment. Thank you.
avatar
vsprakash2003
Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Last visit: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 7
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 7
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Shraddha,
Your statement "The difference between these (verb-ing/verb-ed and noun+noun 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" - This contradicts what Manhattan GMAT's SC book page 91 says. MGMAT'S SC says that "ing is the most flexible form and can be used to modify the entire preceding clause as long as the entire preceding clause can act as the subject. Use "ing" form when you want to express the result of the preceding clause""
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
32,345
 [1]
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi @vsprakash2003,

Please go through the following articles to learn the usage of "verb-ing" modifiers:
usage-of-verb-ing-modifiers-135220.html
verb-ing-modifiers-part-2-in-our-first-article-on-verb-ing-135567.html

The "verb-ing" modifier preceded by a comma always modifies the preceding clause. The Manhattan GMAT's SC book also says that this modifier modify the entire preceding clause. What the mean by the entire preceding clause can act as teh subject is that the modifier associates with the entire clause (subject and verb) and not just the subject. The verb-ing modifier denotes an action. This ction must make sense with the preceding clause. This is my interpretation of the content.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
avatar
soumens
Joined: 05 Sep 2012
Last visit: 21 Jun 2013
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
82
 [1]
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 41
Kudos: 82
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi

Not sure if this is the right place to pose my query, but here goes. I have a query regarding prepositional phrase used as modifiers:

Do prepositional phrase modifiers modify the closest noun or the whole clause???

Consider below eg.

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.
Source: OG 12 Q.No. 78
(This is a incorrect choice)

The reason cited in OG says that the modifier "in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy" modifies "perpetrators" which is illogical.

I thought that the modifier was modifying the whole clause.

Am I missing something over here? Do prepositional phrase modifiers modify the closest noun or the whole clause???

Will be thankful if you can give eg.

Thanks,
Soumen
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
32,345
 [12]
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
 [12]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
7
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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
avatar
soumens
Joined: 05 Sep 2012
Last visit: 21 Jun 2013
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 41
Kudos: 82
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Loads of Thanks Shraddha.

Could not have hoped for a better explanation.. :-D
User avatar
santy
Joined: 22 May 2010
Last visit: 01 Aug 2022
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
130
 [1]
Given Kudos: 105
Posts: 26
Kudos: 130
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello eGmat,
Thanks for this great article. Even though I knew before about comma verb+ing modifiers and noun + noun modifiers separately, i learnt how those concepts can be tested together in one question.

I have a doubt about 'One automobile manufacturer .. two decades' example, In the article you mention that -

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 zoom into “increase” to present more information about this aspect of the preceding clause.



Does this mean that this noun + noun modifier modify the noun 'increase' in the preceding clause or the entire idea of the clause?
I think it modifies entire clause because 'increase' is not used as a noun in the preceding clause. It is used as an infinitive 'to increase'
Is my understanding correct?
avatar
sarcastic
Joined: 09 Dec 2010
Last visit: 12 Mar 2014
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
23
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V41
WE:Securities Sales and Trading (Finance: Investment Banking)
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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)
User avatar
mohish
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Last visit: 09 Nov 2014
Posts: 147
Own Kudos:
Posts: 147
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
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.

ok. If that's the case, was wondering how you mention the following:

egmat
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.

Your diagram says that "amounting" and "representing" modify "announced plans"; but should they actually not modify "one manufacturer", since it is the "subject".
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
@sarcastic: Please check the response here

emily-dickinsons-letters-to-susan-huntington-dickinson-were-10142-100.html

-Shraddha
avatar
anuraag458
Joined: 27 Mar 2013
Last visit: 30 Oct 2015
Posts: 1
Given Kudos: 15
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GPA: 3.3
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks a lot for simplifying this topic yet again!!
User avatar
bagdbmba
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Last visit: 10 Dec 2021
Posts: 1,005
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 156
Posts: 1,005
Kudos: 4,165
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

Hi Shraddha,
Could you please clarify what sort of sentence structure it is - the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions ?

I think, the underlined part is in passive voice. Right ? But what role 'in effect' has here ?

Look forward to hear your thoughts on this...
User avatar
bagdbmba
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Last visit: 10 Dec 2021
Posts: 1,005
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 156
Posts: 1,005
Kudos: 4,165
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
bagdbmba
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

Hi Shraddha,
Could you please clarify what sort of sentence structure it is - the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions ?

I think, the underlined part is in passive voice. Right ? But what role 'in effect' has here ?

Look forward to hear your thoughts on this...

Hi eGMAT,
Could you please provide an update on this ? It's pretty long pending!

Would appreciate your feedback.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,600
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 685
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,600
Kudos: 32,345
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
bagdbmba
Hi Shraddha,
Could you please clarify what sort of sentence structure it is - the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions ?

I think, the underlined part is in passive voice. Right ? But what role 'in effect' has here ?

Look forward to hear your thoughts on this...

Hi @bagdbmba,

You're right: "the perpetrators are told" is in the passive voice, since they aren't doing the telling - they're told by someone else.

"In effect" is a prepositional modifier; i.e., a modifier that begins with a preposition. Here, it functions as an adverb, telling us more about the action "told". So, the meaning here is that in saying that the perpetrator's misbehavior is the result of an allergic reaction, one is practically telling the perpetrators that they aren't to blame for their misbehavior.

I hope this helps!

Regards,
Meghna
User avatar
gmatter0913
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Last visit: 02 Oct 2014
Posts: 219
Own Kudos:
1,280
 [1]
Given Kudos: 86
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Posts: 219
Kudos: 1,280
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is very useful. Thank you.

e-gmat rocks!!
 1   2   
Moderator:
General GMAT Forum Moderator
357 posts