DIII
In one of his videos, Ron Purewal says that "including" doesn't work like any other verb-ing, and that "including" modifies the noun before the comma.
Can someone clarify this?
Dear
DIII,
I'm happy to respond.
The great Mr. Ron Purewal is certainly a genius, but I am going to disagree slightly.
First of all, modifying the previous noun is not categorically unlike any other present participle. Participles are very flexible, sometimes acting as noun modifier and sometimes, as verb modifiers. Certainly there are instances in which we find [noun] [comma] [present participle} when the participle is acting as a modifier for the noun.
When I walked in, I saw the detective, leaning against a pillar and smoking a cigarette.
Of course, that's less a GMAT SC sentence and more one from a tawdry thriller novel, but the grammar is the same.
Also, I would say that, for the majority of the time, the participle "
including" acts as a noun modifier and modifies the noun it touches. Occasionally, a vital noun modifier would come between the participle and the target noun, and it is possible that this vital noun modifier is a long clause. That's precisely what is happening in the OA of this question.
(E)
The principal feature of the redesigned checks is a series of printed instructions that the company hopes will help merchants confirm a check’s authenticity, including reminders to watch the endorsement, compare signatures, and view the watermark while holding the check to the light.
Notice that the purple part, from "
that" to "
authenticity," is a giant adjectival clause, a noun-modifying clause, all modifying the phrase "
printed instructions." That phrase is the target of the participle "
including."
Usually, when the word "
including" is going to be used as a verb modifier, it's in the
gerund form following the preposition "by."
Maxwell described the first unified field, electromagnetism, by including Faraday's Law and expanding Ampere's Law.
Does all this make sense?
Mike