Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 01:45 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 01:45
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   3   4   5   6   
655-705 Level|   Meaning/Logical Predication|   Modifiers|   Verb Tense/Form|                           
User avatar
thakurarun85
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jul 2021
Last visit: 21 Sep 2022
Posts: 224
Own Kudos:
53
Given Kudos: 29
Posts: 224
Kudos: 53
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 10 Dec 2021, 07:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyTargetTestPrep
thakurarun85

Please help.

When we talk about general truth we use simple present. Here why we are using " its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities." the bold are all -ed form.
Hi thakurarun85.

Those -ed words are modifiers that describe how things are in the present. So, they communicate that, in the present, the "acoustic energy" IS "prevented from dissipating" and that the "boundaries in the ocean" ARE "created by water layers."

Thus, they do communicate general truths about the present.
Show more

Got It. This is really basic. Thanks
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 10 Dec 2021, 09:34
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi thakurarun85, perhaps you thought that prevented is a simple past tense verb here.

prevented can definitely be used as a simple past tense verb, but here, it's actually used as a past participle.

Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses a simple framework to distinguish between "Simple Past Tense verb" and "Past Participle", its application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
User avatar
arya251294
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jan 2019
Last visit: 16 Mar 2024
Posts: 188
Own Kudos:
57
Given Kudos: 368
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
Posts: 188
Kudos: 57
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 12 Dec 2021, 11:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Economist
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.


(A) prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of

(B) prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by

(C) its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

(D) its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of

(E) preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by

Show more

Hi VeritasKarishma
This sentence here is an example of an absolute phrase right? The one you explained to me the other day?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,986
 [2]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,986
 [2]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 12 Dec 2021, 22:59
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
arya251294
Economist
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.


(A) prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of

(B) prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by

(C) its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

(D) its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of

(E) preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by


Hi VeritasKarishma
This sentence here is an example of an absolute phrase right? The one you explained to me the other day?
Show more

Yes, option (C) has an absolute phrase (underlined)

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.
User avatar
arya251294
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jan 2019
Last visit: 16 Mar 2024
Posts: 188
Own Kudos:
57
Given Kudos: 368
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
Posts: 188
Kudos: 57
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 13 Dec 2021, 03:48
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
arya251294
Economist
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.


(A) prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of

(B) prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by

(C) its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

(D) its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of

(E) preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by


Hi VeritasKarishma
This sentence here is an example of an absolute phrase right? The one you explained to me the other day?

Yes, option (C) has an absolute phrase (underlined)

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.
Show more

Thanks a lot again for the prompt reply. You rock :please:
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 04 Jan 2022, 21:02
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
lakshya14
Hi, what's the problem with (E). The verb-ing is modifying the subject of the preceding clause, i.e. "sound". How can it be better than (C)?
Hello, lakshya14. We are getting to be virtual pals, as often as we are crossing paths. Choice (E) has a fatal flaw that does not make logical sense. Try inserting it into the shell of the sentence:

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

What, exactly, is preventing the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating? Would it make sense to say that sound prevents its own acoustic energy from dissipating? Is there some sort of built-in self-preservation mechanism that we need to be aware of? Are we then to understand that boundaries in the non-negotiable part of the sentence act as sound-dissipators? If so, that is actually the opposite of what the shell of the sentence would suggest. Would it not make more sense for a boundary to contain something? And if something is contained in water, then it does not dissipate, and that is what we are after. Compare to (C):

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

Aha, so straightened out, with the sentence in a more active voice, we understand that boundaries in the ocean prevent the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating, thereby allowing sound to travel through water for enormous distances. That makes perfect sense, and we did not get tangled up in any seaweed following the logic.

I hope that helps. If you need further clarification, just ask.

- Andrew
Show more

Hi AndrewN - loved the way meaning was used to eliminate betwen E vs C

Just curious, can you use meaning to eliminate D ?

I thought D made sense from a meaning perspective also because
  • Thought it was possible for boundaries to be responsible for the act of accoustic energy being dissipated specifically
Given this possibility perhaps was taking place (note - i am not a science major) -- i could not cross off D vs C, based on meaning.

I guessed between C and D
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [1]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 05 Jan 2022, 08:25
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
AndrewN
lakshya14
Hi, what's the problem with (E). The verb-ing is modifying the subject of the preceding clause, i.e. "sound". How can it be better than (C)?
Hello, lakshya14. We are getting to be virtual pals, as often as we are crossing paths. Choice (E) has a fatal flaw that does not make logical sense. Try inserting it into the shell of the sentence:

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

What, exactly, is preventing the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating? Would it make sense to say that sound prevents its own acoustic energy from dissipating? Is there some sort of built-in self-preservation mechanism that we need to be aware of? Are we then to understand that boundaries in the non-negotiable part of the sentence act as sound-dissipators? If so, that is actually the opposite of what the shell of the sentence would suggest. Would it not make more sense for a boundary to contain something? And if something is contained in water, then it does not dissipate, and that is what we are after. Compare to (C):

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

Aha, so straightened out, with the sentence in a more active voice, we understand that boundaries in the ocean prevent the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating, thereby allowing sound to travel through water for enormous distances. That makes perfect sense, and we did not get tangled up in any seaweed following the logic.

I hope that helps. If you need further clarification, just ask.

- Andrew

Hi AndrewN - loved the way meaning was used to eliminate betwen E vs C

Just curious, can you use meaning to eliminate D ?

I thought D made sense from a meaning perspective also because
  • Thought it was possible for boundaries to be responsible for the act of accoustic energy being dissipated specifically
Given this possibility perhaps was taking place (note - i am not a science major) -- i could not cross off D vs C, based on meaning.

I guessed between C and D
Show more
Hello, jabhatta2. Thank you for the kind words. How about we take a look at answer choices (C) and (D) side by side in the context of the sentence?

Quote:
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

(C) its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by

(D) its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of
Show more
You can see that there are two differences between the two options. Although the first split has the potential to lead to more than one interpretation, I would call each an issue of diction—the manner in which an idea is expressed in written form—rather than one of meaning. Both dissipating and being dissipated are gerunds serving as the object of the preposition from. In the former iteration, the energy itself is said to be doing something, dissipating, while in the latter, I cannot dismiss the interpretation, on grammar alone, that the energy could purportedly be dissipated via the boundaries that follow the underlined portion. Consider:

a) [something] prevented from being dissipated — i.e. it would dissipate on its own if not for some unnamed obstacle (the emphasis is on prevented)

b) [something] prevented from being dissipated — i.e. it would not dissipate on its own, but would require some unnamed agent to facilitate its dissipation (the emphasis is on being)

I think a more compelling case can be made semantically for the first interpretation. Something that prevents is not understood at the same time to be requisite to allowing a process to unfold. (Even a catalyst contributes to a reaction.) As such, I would say that ambiguity of meaning is not an issue here: dissipating is simply a better, clearer way of saying what needs to be said than being dissipated.

Now, in terms of the second split, by follows a patent passive construct: [verb-ed] + by + noun; as a result of is typically used to preface a noun phrase, one that explains a process of some sort. As a result of boundaries does not make sense—and this sort of construct, as a result + noun/pronoun, is often used in incorrect answer choices—but if we first encountered a description of what those boundaries were doing, such usage would be more appropriate:

As a result of the viscosity of seawater, in combination with other factors that can create underwater boundaries, the acoustic energy of sound is prevented from dissipating.

I am not saying that the above sentence would be the one and only way of expressing the idea, but it is a passable sentence.

In short, I would disfavor (D) because (C) conveys the vital meaning of the sentence in a clear and concise way. Thank you for thinking to follow up with me on this one. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
User avatar
Dinesh654
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2021
Last visit: 11 Aug 2024
Posts: 155
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 217
Status:In learning mode...
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Posts: 155
Kudos: 9
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 01 May 2022, 05:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
lakshya14
Hi, what's the problem with (E). The verb-ing is modifying the subject of the preceding clause, i.e. "sound". How can it be better than (C)?
Hello, lakshya14. We are getting to be virtual pals, as often as we are crossing paths. Choice (E) has a fatal flaw that does not make logical sense. Try inserting it into the shell of the sentence:

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

What, exactly, is preventing the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating? Would it make sense to say that sound prevents its own acoustic energy from dissipating? Is there some sort of built-in self-preservation mechanism that we need to be aware of? Are we then to understand that boundaries in the non-negotiable part of the sentence act as sound-dissipators? If so, that is actually the opposite of what the shell of the sentence would suggest. Would it not make more sense for a boundary to contain something? And if something is contained in water, then it does not dissipate, and that is what we are after. Compare to (C):

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

Aha, so straightened out, with the sentence in a more active voice, we understand that boundaries in the ocean prevent the acoustic energy of sound from dissipating, thereby allowing sound to travel through water for enormous distances. That makes perfect sense, and we did not get tangled up in any seaweed following the logic.

I hope that helps. If you need further clarification, just ask.

- Andrew
Show more

Hi Andrew,
I got the meaning of C and understand why its wrong.
According to your explanation In then end, do boundries help sound's acoustic energy from dissipating?
or boundries act as a hurdle for sound and as a result its hard for sound to go through it?
so its energy is prevented from dissipating by boundries of ocean.
In other words "by boundries..." is modfying dissipating or prevented in C? I think both have a slightly different meaning?
Is it true?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [2]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 02 May 2022, 03:08
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
dcoolguy
Hi Andrew,
I got the meaning of C and understand why its wrong.
According to your explanation In then end, do boundries help sound's acoustic energy from dissipating?
or boundries act as a hurdle for sound and as a result its hard for sound to go through it?
so its energy is prevented from dissipating by boundries of ocean.
In other words "by boundries..." is modfying dissipating or prevented in C? I think both have a slightly different meaning?
Is it true?
Show more
Hello, dcoolguy. A boundary is, by definition, a barrier of some sort, so within the sentence at hand, we understand that water layers are acting as a collective boundary that keeps sound more "intact" than such energy waves would be on their own. Thus, these boundaries aid in the transfer of sound over enormous distances through seawater. (Without the boundaries, the sound would dissipate.)

Thank you for following up.

- Andrew
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 02 May 2022, 07:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATGuruNY - while i agree (C) is the answer, what is the absolute modifier in (C) modifying ? Is the absolute phrase, modfiying

Quote:

(1) Subject only - Sound
OR
(2) the entire clause - Sound can travel through water for enormous distances
Or
(3) closest noun - distances

I believe absolute phrases MODIFY the the entire clause whereas appositives modify, just the closest noun.
Show more

Absolute modifiers i think modify clauses but the subect of the clause is the closest noun i thought (which would be - distances)
User avatar
GMATGuruNY
User avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,344
Own Kudos:
3,796
Given Kudos: 9
Schools:Dartmouth College
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,344
Kudos: 3,796
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 02 May 2022, 13:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Hi GMATGuruNY - while i agree (C) is the answer, what is the absolute modifier in (C) modifying ? Is the absolute phrase, modfiying

Quote:

(1) Subject only - Sound
OR
(2) the entire clause - Sound can travel through water for enormous distances
Or
(3) closest noun - distances

I believe absolute phrases MODIFY the the entire clause whereas appositives modify, just the closest noun.

Absolute modifiers i think modify clauses but the subect of the clause is the closest noun i thought (which would be - distances)
Show more

Typical construction of an absolute phrase:
COMMA + POSSESSIVE + NOUN or NOUN PHRASE + MODIFIER(S)
Generally, the possessive and noun will refer to the preceding subject, while the entire phrase plays an adverbial role, providing context for the preceding action.
In most cases, an absolute phrase will appear at the END of an SC.

OA: Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean.
Here:
The portion in blue is an absolute phrase.
its acoustic energy (possessive + noun phrase) refers to sound (the preceding subject).
The entire absolute phrase provides context for the preceding action -- can travel -- expressing why sound CAN TRAVEL for enormous distances.
User avatar
sagoel1994
User avatar
Joined: 24 Jan 2020
Last visit: 25 Nov 2024
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 14
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.1
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 28 May 2022, 11:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In this question, answer C cannot be correct as it will end up connecting two independent clauses by only a comma - which is incorrect. How come it is the right answer?
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 28 May 2022, 15:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sagoel1994
In this question, answer C cannot be correct as it will end up connecting two independent clauses by only a comma - which is incorrect. How come it is the right answer?
Show more
Notice that, in the (C) version, "prevented" does not name an action taken by the acoustic energy. Rather, "prevented from dissipating" describes the acoustic energy. So, there's no verb in the structure that follows the comma.

So, what follows the comma in the (C) version is not a clause. It's a type of modifying phrase called an absolute phrase
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [1]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 29 May 2022, 03:04
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sagoel1994
In this question, answer C cannot be correct as it will end up connecting two independent clauses by only a comma - which is incorrect. How come it is the right answer?
Show more
As MartyTargetTestPrep suggests, prevented is acting as a "past participle" and not as a "simple past tense verb" in option C.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses framework to distinguish between Simple Past Tense verb and Past participle, its application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
User avatar
yipmewmew
User avatar
Joined: 26 May 2021
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 230
Own Kudos:
83
Given Kudos: 792
Location: India
Schools: Ross '26 (D)
GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V33
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Ross '26 (D)
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Posts: 230
Kudos: 83
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 19 Jun 2022, 10:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi, can someone explain what is the problem with option D? I understand that "as a result of" sounds wordy but can someone give me a better reason?
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,762
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,762
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 20 Jun 2022, 04:57
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sv2023
Hi, can someone explain what is the problem with option D? I understand that "as a result of" sounds wordy but can someone give me a better reason?
Show more

Hello sv2023,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the only flaw in Option D is, indeed, its wordiness; the use of the phrase "prevented from being dissipated as a result of" leads to awkwardness and redundancy.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,080
 [1]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 20 Jun 2022, 18:34
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sv2023
Hi, can someone explain what is the problem with option D? I understand that "as a result of" sounds wordy but can someone give me a better reason?
Show more
Hi sv2023,

Apart from wordiness/awkwardness, as a result of also leads to loss of meaning clarity. That is, by does a much better job of telling us that what prevents acoustic energy from dissipating is boundaries.
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 21 Jun 2022, 18:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATGuruNY - you said COMMA + Verb'ed ALWAYS modify the closest noun ?

Is there a reason why Comma + Verb'ing modify the subject and the clause WHEREAS COMMA + Verb'ed does not follow that same pattern ?

What is the reason for this difference ?

I thought COMMA + Verb'ed and Comma + Verb'ing were both adverbial modifers at the end of the day
User avatar
GMATGuruNY
User avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,344
Own Kudos:
3,796
Given Kudos: 9
Schools:Dartmouth College
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,344
Kudos: 3,796
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from Updated on: 22 Jun 2022, 05:52
Originally posted by GMATGuruNY on 22 Jun 2022, 04:11.
Last edited by GMATGuruNY on 22 Jun 2022, 05:52, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
I thought COMMA + Verb'ed and Comma + Verb'ing were both adverbial modifers at the end of the day
Show more

This statement is not quite correct.
Whereas COMMA + VERBing plays an important adverbial role, COMMA + VERbed generally does not.

COMMA + VERBed functions primarily as an ADJECTIVE modifying the preceding noun or noun phrase.
An incorrect answer choice in the OG20:
Many of the images date from the time of the Kushan Empire, fashioned from the spotted sandstone of Mathura.
The OG's explanation:
Placement of the modifier fashioned suggests that the Empire (the closest noun), not the images, was fashioned out of these materials.
Any adverbial role played by COMMA + VERBed will be quite limited.
Here, the modifier fashioned tells us nothing about the preceding action (how the images DATE).

When it follows a clause, however, COMMA + VERBing serves both as an ADJECTIVE (modifying the preceding subject) and as an ADVERB (providing context for the preceding verb).
An OA in the OG12:
Animal-hide shields were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors against enemy arrows.
Here, COMMA + protecting serves both as an ADJECTIVE modifying the preceding subject shields (since the SHIELDS perform the act of PROTECTING) and as an ADVERB modifying the preceding verb were (expressing WHY the shields WERE essential).

In short, the two modifiers function differently.
Whereas COMMA + VERBed typically modifies the preceding noun or noun phrase, COMMA + VERBing after a clause modifies the preceding subject and verb.
User avatar
GMATGuruNY
User avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,344
Own Kudos:
3,796
 [2]
Given Kudos: 9
Schools:Dartmouth College
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,344
Kudos: 3,796
 [2]
Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from 22 Jun 2022, 04:36
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sv2023
Hi, can someone explain what is the problem with option D? I understand that "as a result of" sounds wordy but can someone give me a better reason?
Show more

The issue is not wordiness but meaning.
by and as a result of convey different meanings.

Correct: Mary was promoted by her boss.
Incorrect: Mary was promoted as a result of her boss.
Here, the noun phrase in blue performs the preceding action -- the boss promoted Mary -- so we use by rather than as a result of.

Incorrect: Mary was laid off by the recession.
Correct: Mary was laid off as a result of the recession.
Here, the noun in blue does NOT perform the preceding action -- the recession did not lay Mary off -- so we use as a result of rather than by.

OA for the SC above:
its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by boundaries in the ocean.
Here, the noun phrase in blue performs the preceding action -- the boundaries prevent the energy from dissipating -- so we use by rather than as a result of.

Also:
Correctly used, as a result of should generally refer to the OUTCOME of an action, event, change, etc.
as a result of THE NEW LAW
as a result of THE RECESSION
as a result of THE INCREASE
In D, boundaries do not constitute an action, event or change, so the use of as result of seems illogical.
   1   2   3   4   5   6   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts