Responding to a pm:

Note that "his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." and "his life being uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." are not independent clauses because they have no verb in them.

The following are independent clauses and one of these is what you need with the coordinating conjunction ('and') and semi colon:

"his life was uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." or
"his life was being uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case."

Accuracy wise, the use of 'being' is still suspect. 'Being' is not used to describe a state; it is used to describe an ongoing action such as 'the tree is being uprooted'.

Colon is used if you need to give a list and hence, is not suitable here. So options (B), (C), (D) and (E) are wrong.

Only option (A) describes circumstance suitably using the modifier "his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case."
_________________

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-



Choice A: Option A links the independent and dependent clauses, appropriately, using the latter as a modifying phrase for the word "circumstance" and linking them through a comma. Thus, Option A is correct.

Choice B: In Option B, we see the clause "his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.", which is not an independent clause as it has no active verb. This clause is linked to the primary clause through the combination of a comma and the word "and". This method is not the appropriate way to link an independent clause with a dependent clause. Thus, Option B is incorrect.

Choice C: Option C suffers from the same error that Option B does. Additionally, Option C unnecessarily uses the word "being" to describe a state of existence. This use of “being” is a form of redundancy. Thus, Option C is incorrect.

Choice D: In Option D, we see the incorrect use of a semicolon to link an independent and dependent clause. Remember, the second clause is not independent, as it has no active verb. Thus, Option D is incorrect.

Choice E: In Option E, we see the incorrect use of a colon to link an independent and dependent clause. Option E also makes the error of using "being" to describe a state of existence. This error is quite similar to the redundancy error seen in Option C. Thus, Option E is incorrect.

Hence, A is the best answer choice.

Option A may seem like an odd choice, as it has a rather unique modifier structure; in this structure, we find a noun followed by a participle at the beginning or end of the sentence. Such a structure is known as the absolute phrase and is used to provide additional information.

To understand the concept of “Past perfect Tense and the use of ‘Had’ on GMAT”, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):




All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

is the answer A ?
The part beginning 'his life...' explains the circumstance and acts as appositive.

B seems wrong for incorrect parallelism. If you break the conjunction - The defense lawyer and witnesses portrayed his life uprooted... doesn't sound correct.
C and E are out for unnecessary 'being'
D is out as the clause 'his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.' doesn't have an active verb.

Also as a forum rule, you must update the OA.

Hi,
Sorry, yes the OA is (A).
My major doubt is how is 'uprooted' a participle. I mean 'uprooted' can also act as a main verb and the second part of the sentence can be an independent clause.
Thats why I went with (d).

his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.
Here 'uprooted' is a state (like adjectives beautiful, graceful, painful etc) of his life, not an action on his life.

The statement could be:

his life was uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.

Hi Karishma,

I am trying to understand the structure here. Normally I have seen verbing or noun + noun modifier to modifier the preceding clause. I am not that familiar with this modifier structure.

As per veritasprep explanation.
it is modifier structure (called an absolute phrase). Can you please explain this modifier structure.
_________________

Often (but not always), this is the structure of an absolute phrase:

noun + participle (could be -ing or -ed) + optional modifier or object

It modifies an independent clause as a whole.

It is often useful in describing one part of the whole person/place/thing or in explaining a cause or condition etc. The absolute phrase above describes the life of the accused - a condition.

Other examples:
There was no one in sight and Paul, his hands still jammed in his pockets, scowled down the empty street.
We devoured the yummy cupcake, our fingers scraping the leftover frosting off the plates.
_________________

VeritasPrepKarishma
But don't we need past perfect here?

Yeah, you are right. Thanks for the explanation.
Umm one more thing. Do you have any idea whether Veritas prep CATs are a good enough indicator? I mean the level of their question and scoring pattern. Scored 740 in Gmatprep, 730 in Manhattan and just 670 in the free Veritas CAT with just 36 in verbal and 46 in quant.

To add to what Zosimus said, a verb will take the past perfect tense when there are actual or implied multiple actions taking place at different points in time in the past. There is only one actual verb "portrayed". "his life uprooted..." is an appositive i.e. a modifier. So there will be no past perfect verb in this sentence.

Suggest you to check out this post on past perfect: http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2015/03 ... questions/
_________________

Yes, our test scores are quite accurate and usually within 30 points of the actual score. That said, if you scored unexpectedly low in one test, it could be because of an "off" day. Perhaps you were distracted or in a foul mood etc. A lot of things can impact your test score so I would suggest you to relax and take another test in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile, focus on the errors you made and try to strengthen those areas. A lower score in a test means a higher opportunity to identify weaknesses and hence more value obtained from the test.
_________________

but two independent clauses separated by a comma is grammatically incorrect, I eliminate A right away, can someone explain? Thanks ccooley

Note that "his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." and "his life being uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." are not independent clauses because they have no finite verbs in them. They are absolute phrases.
Read about them here: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/0 ... -the-gmat/

The following are independent clauses:
"his life was uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case."
"his life was being uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case."
etc
_________________

VeritasPrepKarishma : Can you explain how to recognize absolute phrases?
_________________

Here is my post on absolute phrases: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/0 ... -the-gmat/
_________________

OFFICIAL SOLUTION

“his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.” and “his life being uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.” are not independent clauses because they have no finite verbs in them.

With the coordinating conjunction (‘and’) and semi colon, you need an independent clause.

Accuracy wise, the use of ‘being’ is still suspect. ‘Being’ is not used to describe a state; it is used to describe an ongoing action such as ‘the tree is being uprooted’.

Colon is used if you need to give a list and hence, is not suitable here. Hence, options (B), (C), (D) and (E) are wrong.

Only option (A) describes circumstances suitably using the absolute phrase: his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case.

Answer (A)
_________________

Hey VeritasPrepKarishma,

When a colon is used, it generally should talk / refer back to the subject of the first sentence. In Option D it doesn't do that and hence usage of colon is totally uncalled for.

Is my reasoning correct?
_________________

Option (D) uses a semi colon. A semi colon joins two independent clauses.
"his life uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case." is not an independent clause because it doesn't have a verb in it.

To use a semi colon, you need this:
"his life was uprooted by the media pressure to punish someone in the case."

Colon is used if you need to give a list and hence, is not suitable here.
_________________

I still don't understand why (B) is incorrect - in your explanation, you say that (B) is incorrect because there was a colon (which there isn't).

Why is (A) better than (B)?