The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction

Question

The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students .

(A) The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students

(B) For undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a two-year course, being a comprehensive introduction to modern physics

(C) A comprehensive introduction was in a two-year course by the physicist Richard Feynman presenting to undergraduate students an introduction to modern physics

(D) Presenting a comprehensive introduction, the physicist Richard Feynman introduced modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students

(E) In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics

daagh · Accepted Answer

A) The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics designed for undergraduate students in a two-year course ---  The wording indicates that modern physics was designed for the undergraduate students. The course was designed for the students. This is a wrong word order.

B) For undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a two-year course, being a comprehensive introduction to modern physics. --  Wrongly suggests that the entire course was dedicated to the introduction to modern physics. 
 
C) A comprehensive introduction was in a two-year course by the physicist Richard Feynman presenting to undergraduate students an introduction to modern physics. ...  Distorted meaning as though the introduction itself was the course.

D) Presenting a comprehensive introduction, the physicist Richard Feynman introduced modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students. ...  He did not introduce modern physics. He only presented an introduction to modern physics. 
 
E) In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics. --  takes care of all the meaning and word order problems. correct choice.

Patronus · Answer

A) The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics designed for undergraduate students in a two-year course.
 Is "modern physics" designed for "undergraduate students"? No. "modern physics" is universal not just for them.
 
B) For undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a two-year course, being a comprehensive introduction to modern physics.
 1) "being...physics" seems to modify "the physicist"! 
2) "the physicist..presented a two year course" TO "undergraduate students" not "FOR undergraduate students"
 
C) A comprehensive introduction was in a two-year course by the physicist Richard Feynman presenting to undergraduate students an introduction to modern physics.
 How can a "A comprehensive introduction" be in "two year course". Students can be in "two year course" or some body can be in a course, not an "introduction". 
 
D) Presenting a comprehensive introduction, the physicist Richard Feynman introduced modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students.
 "1) Presenting..introduction, ...introduced". How many times do you want to "introduce"? Thus this sentence has a redundant usage. 
 2) Second half "the physicist...students" is perfectly correct.

E) In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics.
 "In a two-year...students" is NOT a noun modifier. Please note that GMAT does NOT only test noun modifier. There are  adverbial modifiers  too! 
So ask the question, WHERE did the action of "the physicist presented"? happen 
 Answer:   "In a two year....students".

P.S.: Adverbial modifiers do not touch the verb they modify (in this case: "presented") and thus their placement does NOT follow the "touch rule" (sacred for noun modifiers"). This is acceptable.

iamdp · Answer

• The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics
designed for undergraduate students in a two-year course.

>The physicist presented introduction to students and not physics.   Also physics is not designed for students but the course is.

• For undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a two-year course,
being a comprehensive introduction to modern physics.

>The language is awkward. Moreover usage of being. Read the sentence you'll see it doesn't make sense

• A comprehensive  introduction  was in a  two-year course by the  physicist Richard Feynman
presenting to undergraduate students an introduction to modern physics.

> Passive voice and several other errors.

• Presenting a comprehensive introduction, the physicist Richard Feynman introduced modern
physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students.

> Perfect . I'll go with this option

•  In a two-year course  designed for undergraduate students,  the physicist  Richard Feynman
presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics.

> The intended meaning is while presenting the introduction, the physicist introduced physics in the course designed for the students.

asdfghjklasdfghj · Answer

Hi Mike, could you help me out on this one ? So I am able to see that answer choice A is wrong because "in a two course" is a prep. phrase for "physics" what is nonsense. Using POE there is nothing left than Answer choice E in fact. But I am not completely sure why the prepositional phrase at the beginning of answer choice E can jump the noun " the physicist Fayman". I know that noun modifiers "Appositive modifiers" can jump to every noun in the sentence (https://gmatclub.com/forum/noun-noun-mo ... 37292.html) but this is not the case here since we have a prepositional phrase. So why can we "jump" ? - Cleared Ok, apparently we have here a so called adverbial modifier, which modifiers verbs. And knowing that verb modifiers have looser rules than noun modifiers (probs to the magoosh website) It generally should explain HOW things are done. The problem that I still have is that "In a two year course" does not really tells me HOW he presented. For example in this question: Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and s aw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline. (A) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang (B) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs were hanging (C) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging (D) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging (E) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung I can clearly see that the part "with arms and legs hanging" describes the HOW these monkey sleep. So all in all... My final question (and after some study my only) is: in which way does "In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students" modifies the verb "presented" I hope my question is clear

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear asdfghjklasdfghj , I'm happy to respond. :-)

I will clarify a few points, some of which you appear to understand. 1) An appositive phrase is simply one kind of noun modifier. There is no appositive in this sentence. 2) Prepositional phrases can act as either noun modifiers or verb modifier . 3) Under most cases, noun modifiers have to obey the Modifier Touch Rule , although there are a few important exceptions. 4) Verb modifiers are NOT subject to the Modifier Touch Rule at all . Verb modifiers can be placed in a variety of locations in a sentence, as long as there's no ambiguity. The placement of verb modifiers is considerably more free than that of noun modifiers. 5) Verb modifiers, like individual adverbs, answer questions such as: how? why? when? where? in what way? Now, consider (E) from this sentence. In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students, the physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics . The prepositional phrase at the beginning is a verb modifier answer a "WHERE" question: it tells us WHERE Feynman presented this introduction. Because it's a verb modifier, it doesn't have to touch anything. Finally, I will say that, in a slightly later post, you spoke condescendingly to my brilliant colleague daagh . Look at daagh's kudo count! He has been on GMAT Club for much longer than I have, and for years he has done high quality work here. I don't believe he was addressing your question at all: it just happened that his post followed yours. You are a student still mastering this material. It doesn't make you look good when you chide someone who is much more knowledgable than you. Remember that GMAT Club is a public place, and anyone on this site now might some day be your colleague, your boss, your employee, your customer, your supplier, etc. etc. You always get only one chance to make a first impression. Courtesy and respect open many doors in life. My friend, I want to support your success at many levels. Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

asdfghjklasdfghj · Answer

Thank you so much for the insights ! It helped a lot ! The point that I was missing here is that adverbial modifiers (verb modifiers) not only answer the HOW question but all the other W-questions. Nice to know. Helpful as always, thanks Mike

But concerning my message with daagh, I think you misunderstood me. When you look at the question from this thread, answer choice A says: (A) The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students But the answer choice A in the question daagh refers to says: A) The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics designed for undergraduate students in a two-year course That is not the same question the wording is different. That was all I wanted to point out. I did not want to insult daagh, he helped me out a lot and I appreciate his help very much.

daagh · Answer

asdfghjklasdfghj

I see what the confusion is.

1. Choice A in the original question posted by karlfurt on 21 Nov 2016 is different from what Sagarag had posted on 5 June 2015. In fact, Sagarag's posting was earlier than Karlfurt's. Still, we have assumed Karlfurt's as the original posting, since that is what we are seeing at the top of the topic. 
Of course, what asdfghjklasdfghj copy- pasted on March 4, 2017, was Sagarag's and not karlfurt's and he proceeded to discuss on karlfurt's A after quoting Sagrag's A. We also diligently followed suit by referring to Sagrag's choice rather than karlfurt's choice, since that happens to be the immediately previous post. As one can see, it might not be possible to refer to the original posting every time when lengthy discussions are involved. Sometimes, the discussions run into several pages 
2. I never sought to reply asdfghjklasdfghj in the first place as Mike had earnestly pointed out. If I had wanted to address asdfghjklasdfghj's query, I would have quoted him or marked him. 
3. I owe my sincere thanks to Mike for his spirited defense of me. I also see positively that asdfghjklasdfghj did not mean to chide me. He is one of my well- wishing enthusiasts and has stamped several acclaims in recent times. I thank him too.

Hope this clears the haze.

asdfghjklasdfghj · Answer

Had my GMAT-Test today and received a solid 720 (Q50 V37). I could not concentrate anymore at the end of the verbal section but apparently my prior work was sufficient

What a journey, thank you all for all your feedback (especially yours @daagh) In the end I can recommend: -Gmatclub -Manhattenprep Questions & Thursdays with ron Stay away from: -Explanations from the official guide -Too difficult quant questions here on Gmatclub (some of them are simply ridiculously hard and completely unnecessary, stay with the basics and understand them) It was a pleasure, thank you and goodbye

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear asdfghjklasdfghj , THAT'S FANTASTIC! Congratulations ! I'm very happy for you! :-)

My friend, if I may make one last recommendation--these observations (what you recommend and don't recommend) will be lost in this single SC post. If you have time, please benefit others by posting what you recommend and what you don't in the "Share GMAT Experience" forum as a new post. https://gmatclub.com/forum/share-gmat-experience-8/ You are one of the elite top 10%, so all the others can benefit from your insights. Congratulations and best of luck! Mike McGarry :-)

LakerFan24 · Answer

For me this just honestly came down to "which one sounds the best". What I had to do was take a deep breath and read each A/C one after the other and dig for meaning. Doesn't look like there are many glaring grammar issues.

E stands out. Perfectly mentions that the course is 2 years long, Physicist RF presented an intro on a subject. Makes absolute sense, no way to hide any ambiguity here.

dcummins · Answer

The difference between A and E is that in A we are told that the introduction was presented over a 2 year course whereas E communicates that the introduction subject was presented within the domain of the 2 year course.
E makes more sense.

Why would students be studying an introduction course for 2 years?

SUNNYRHODE002 · Answer

daagh  Sir,

I had one observation while going through your explanation quoted above.

Regarding Option A errors.

You mentioned it appears that "The wording indicates that modern physics was designed for the undergraduate students" Why can't we take  INTRODUCTION TO MODERN PHYSICS  as one entity and then read it again to say that  Introduction to Modern Physics  was designed not only Modern Physics . This way it sounds legit that an Intro Was designed .

Let me know what you think sir.

Thanks

daagh · Answer

A

Sunny

Designed may modify either Physics or introduction. There is an element of ambiguity about it since both are eligible. Shouldn’t it have been clearer? If there was at least a comma before the participle, one can make bold to say that the intended noun is rather the introduction.

That is the reason choice E steers clear of this muddle and the participle modifies a two-year course

GMAT0010 · Answer

Hi,
I solved this problem not by logic, but by understanding the structure of the sentence.
In A, we have:

The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction to modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students.
The bold part is a clause. The part after this is :
a comprehensive introduction to modern physics in a two-year course designed for undergraduate students.
Now this is not a clause. In fact we don't have a verb. The to - part indicates an intention, and hence this part lacks a verb.
So A is out
E is the best choice.
Hope this helps!

chrtpmdr · Answer

This explanation is so wrong ... presented is the verb, if you eliminate (A) based on having no verb, on what rationale do you justify picking (E) which should, according to your logic, have no verb either.

rakshyasimkhada · Answer

Can anyone please explain how there isn't a comma splice error in option E? Isn't the part after the comma independent ?

MBAB123 · Answer

rakshyasimkhada , but the part before the comma isn't - "In a two-year course designed for undergraduate students" is not an independent clause. A comma splice occurs when 2 ICs are connected with a comma. Hope this helps!

jabhatta2 · Answer

Manhattan Solution 
 
This question is testing Modifiers.

The original sentence suggests that Feynman’s introduction covered  physics   designed for undergraduate students . This is nonsensical; the  introduction , rather than  physics , is  designed for undergraduate students  and the  introduction  covers the general topic of physics.

(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) Beginning the sentence with  for undergraduate students  creates an unclear meaning. The verb phrase  being a comprehensive introduction…  following the comma seems illogically to modify the  physicist Richard Feynman . With the use of the unnecessary  being , this creates the awkward suggestion that the  physicist was a comprehensive introduction.  (Remember that  being  is often wrong on the GMAT.)

(C) The sentence’s meaning is unclear due to the use of many prepositional phrases with no punctuation:  in a two-year course  followed by the phrase  by the physicist Richard Feynman  and later  to undergraduate students  and  to modern physics .

Also, the subject of this passive sentence is a  comprehensive introduction .

It would make more sense for  Feynman  to be the subject, since he was  actively  doing something: presenting.

Finally, the use of  presenting  with the passive construction introduces a verb tense error; Feynman is not   currently   presenting the course, rather, the course was presented by Feynman.

(D) The use of  both   introduction  and  introduced  is redundant: it suggests that Feynman introduced a comprehensive introduction.

(E) CORRECT. The placement of the prepositional phrase  in a two-year course    designed for undergraduate students   at the beginning of the sentence clarifies the meaning: a physics course was designed for the students. The construction of the rest of the sentence is straightforward: the subject (the person doing the action) the physicist Richard Feynman, the verb (what he actually did) presented, and the object (what he presented) a comprehensive introduction to modern physics.

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  ReedArnoldMPREP   GMATGuruNY  - this question was in Manhattan CAT 6 so its not official

But, I thought the OA : (E) had a precise meaning problem.

Is the subject "Richard Feynman"  physically  " IN THE COURSE"

No

Hence - based on literal meaning -- i knocked out (E) and chose (A)

Hence - unless the subject can 'physically' be WITHIN the opening modifier - the sentence wont make sense.

Hence I knocked out (E) because  Richard Feynman  is NOT PHYSICALLY in the 2 year course obviously.  Richard Feynman  just teaches the 2 year course.

The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The physicist Richard Feynman presented a comprehensive introduction

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards