Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 28 May 2017, 15:29

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2005, 07:50
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

48% (01:47) correct 52% (00:50) wrong based on 53 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

Although the OA is pretty obvious, how would you syntactically show for the aforementioned construct that "served" and "exhorted" are parallel verbs with "traveling" used as a participle for recruiting agent?

IC, participle and IC with the verb elements from both the IC's being at the "same level" of recursiveness?
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 279
Location: CA, USA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2005, 08:24
obvious as it is, I will go with E

"traveling through the North and exhorting"

modifies the main clause "Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent", it specifies how exactly he worked as recruiting agent.
Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 718
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2005, 08:55
D for me

The structure is

noun phrase modifying Frederick Douglass
Independent clause
partiple phrases to show what he did..

It was tough for me.

Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
- It says that to exhort he travelled.
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
- OUT. This choice has no intended meaning. If it need to be parallel, it could be written like
Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North, and exhorted Black men to join the Union army.
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
- no need of AND. We have a sentence fragment here.
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
-Looks Good.
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting
- OUT Second participle is not parallel. Need exhorted.
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 442
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2006, 16:47
riteshgupta1 wrote:
D for me

The structure is

noun phrase modifying Frederick Douglass
Independent clause
partiple phrases to show what he did..

It was tough for me.

Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
- It says that to exhort he travelled.
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
- OUT. This choice has no intended meaning. If it need to be parallel, it could be written like
Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North, and exhorted Black men to join the Union army.
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
- no need of AND. We have a sentence fragment here.
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
-Looks Good.
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting
- OUT Second participle is not parallel. Need exhorted.

Traveling through the North and exhorting... is the non-restrictive clause. So exhorting and served don't have to be //. In fact, traveling and exhorting need to be //.
VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1167
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 157 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2006, 22:53
E is right.

travelling and exhorting should be parallel.

he served is his job, travelling and exhorting is what he does.
Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 124
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Oct 2006, 20:47
Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

I vote D.

To me E reads like -> Fredrick served as a recruiting agent while he exhorted black men to join the Union army - Sounds repetitious. He served as a recruiting agent and so he exhorted black men to join the army.

I vote for D. To me, D reads like Fredrick served as a recruiting agent while he travelled through the north and exhorted black men to join the army
Director
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 740
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Oct 2006, 08:34
IMO, placement of comma ',' enforces us to use 'and'. So, were left with only two choices: *B or *C
I prefer C over B.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2011, 14:02
dwivedys wrote:
gmataquaguy wrote:
Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

Although the OA is pretty obvious, how would you syntactically show for the aforementioned construct that "served" and "exhorted" are parallel verbs with "traveling" used as a participle for recruiting agent?

E is right here.
Served as a recruiting agent, traveling through the north and exhorting black men ARE ALL PARTICIPIAL PHRASES modifying Fred.

The verbs don't need to be structurally similar IMO, so long as they are semantically (a.k.a participial phrases) similar

IC, participle and IC with the verb elements from both the IC's being at the "same level" of recursiveness?

I selected A for the demand of "Past Participle" in the sentence (and selected A) rather than a "Present Participle" (and selecting E).

Can you tell why you used Present Participle instead of Past Participle?
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3857
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 822

Kudos [?]: 6337 [2] , given: 324

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2011, 21:41
2
KUDOS
The first thing is to define the primary purpose of the passage and then the secondary purpose or secondary purposes, if more than one. We can not logically assign all of them equal status. While the main purpose will take a working verb, the secondary purposes will take the participles, either present or past. At this juncture we must be alert to the fact that part participles very often take the form of simple past (as in this context, traveled is used as a verb here and should not be mistaken for a past participle.)

As such, Choice A will be a run-on without using a conjunction between the two verbs there - wrong

B equates traveled and exhorted with served. In addition the pronoun ‘he’ is redundant; ---wrong; if you mean to equate all the three functions, then you have to say “served, traveled and exhorted”

C equates exhorted with served --wrong

D Exhorted equated with served--- wrong

E, served remains primacy purpose and other incidentals are expressed with present participles—perfect combination and right answer.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2011, 05:07
daagh wrote:
The first thing is to define the primary purpose of the passage and then the secondary purpose or secondary purposes, if more than one. We can not logically assign all of them equal status. While the main purpose will take a working verb, the secondary purposes will take the participles, either present or past. At this juncture we must be alert to the fact that past participles very often take the form of simple past (or atmost other forms of past tense{continuous/perfect etc etc})(as in this context, traveled is used as a verb here and should not be mistaken for a past participle.)

As such, Choice A will be a run-on without using a conjunction two verbs between the two verbs there - wrong

B equates traveled and exhorted with served. In addition the pronoun ‘he’ is redundant; ---wrong; if you mean to equate all the three functions, then you have to say “served, traveled and exhorted”

C equates exhorted with served --wrong

D Exhorted equated with served--- wrong

E, served remains primacy purpose and other incidentals are expressed with present participles—perfect combination and right answer.

Hi daagh
THanks for responding..
I understood and agree your point upto a point as far as primary and secondary purposes are concerned.
But what I noticed was that "past participles very often take the form of simple past" does not hold good because "past participles will always take the form of simple past ", because they modify nouns in PAST. That is why they are PAST participles.

Upon some research, I found from a Grammar book that it is "PAST PASSIVE VOICE" which introduces a PAST Participial phrase in a sentence. Below is an exact excerpt from the book:

Do we only have –ing participles in participial phrases?
In addition to the –ing present participle, the –ed past participle also occurs in participial phrases. –ed participial phrases that function as adjectives are closely related to verbs in passive voice:
--> Annoyed by the students’ behavior, the teacher gave them extra work.

I hope that it is the key to this problem.

Please let me know if anyone of you reading this post has observed deviation from this rule. I will be interested in that.
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3857
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 822

Kudos [?]: 6337 [0], given: 324

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2011, 09:45
joshnsit wrote

Quote:
Point 1. "Past participles will always take the form of simple past ",
-- Do they always take the form of simple Past? Look at the following past participial forms.
Eat - ate - eaten
Eg: Eaten in the Mediterranean, tomatoes were once considered dangerous plants by Europeans

Here are some more examples of past participles in non past-tense forms. Please note that these past participles can not function as past tense verbs. There are so many more.
Arise Arose Arisen
Shrink shrank shrunk –
Bear - bore - borne
Begin began begun
Withdraw withdrew withdrawn
Drink drank drunk

Point 2.
Quote:
Because they modify nouns in PAST. That is why they are PAST participles.
—could you Pl clarify what exactly you mean by calling nouns in the past. Does a noun have a present, past or future?

Well! According to me nope; First thing is that the grammar book you have quoted does not connect past participle with past tense; it connects participle only with passive voice. Passive voice can be expressed both in present and past tense.

Should a past participle be connected only with past tense or can it be connected with present tense also? Let’s see.

Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal was angry
Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal is angry
Both the above are perfectly legal sentences. Few more examples

Targeted by aspirants of management studies in the US mainly, the GMAT is a bench mark test.
Targeted mainly for its affluence in the medieval era, India was battered by a series of raids by the Mediterranean empires.

Similarly, can a present participle using a verb+ing form be used both in present tens and past tense?’

Eg: Rising early in the morning, I go for a brisk walk every day;
Rising early in the morning, I used to go for a brisk walk in my young days

Dropping out from the business school, the shrewd man entered software business to become one of the legends in the history of world.

Dropping out from their primary schools because of abject poverty, many wasted children in the third world countries are becoming a burden to the society

It must now clear that present participle or past participles do not refer to the tense of the sentence; they are just lexical jargons IMO. In essence, they are in fact, timeless and tenseless expressions.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Last edited by daagh on 15 Mar 2011, 17:21, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2011
Posts: 175
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 8

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2011, 21:18
gmataquaguy wrote:
Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

Although the OA is pretty obvious, how would you syntactically show for the aforementioned construct that "served" and "exhorted" are parallel verbs with "traveling" used as a participle for recruiting agent?

IC, participle and IC with the verb elements from both the IC's being at the "same level" of recursiveness?

One more for E. Exhorted should be parallel to travelling not to served ..
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2011, 04:22
@daagh
I am trying to climb the ropes. From your explanations, for :
Point 1, Can we conclude that past participle will take the third form of verb whenever take place in past participle phrase to modify subsequesnt noun? Obviously, we need not to consider the phrases with -ing forms of participle.
So we are good here...

Point 2
From Noun, I meant the noun which will be modified by the past participial phrase. By PAST, I meant nouns getting worked upon by main verbs in past as in timeframe.
And that is why, I am kind of not sure of this sentence "Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal is angry"
If you can confirm the source for the above sentence, it would definitely be clear that participial phrases can modify Nouns in past as well as present timeframes.

Question Time
As said in my last post, my grammar book source "Grammar for Teachers" said that applicability of past participial phrases comes from Passive structure in phrase(not the main sentence). I tried to look into internet more for this, but to no avail.
Your sample sentence however deviates from this rule setup, which again forces me to ask for the source of the below illustrated sentence. I feel like I have seen it in some GMAT book, but cant recollect it.
Targeted mainly for its affluence in the medieval era, India was battered by a series of raids by the Mediterranean empires.

daagh wrote:
joshnsit wrote

Quote:
Point 1. "Past participles will always take the form of simple past ",
-- Do they always take the form of simple Past? Look at the following past participial forms.
Eat - ate - eaten
Eg: Eaten in the Mediterranean, tomatoes were once considered dangerous plants by Europeans

Here are some more examples of past participles in non past-tense forms. Please note that these past participles can not function as past tense verbs. There are so many more.
Arise Arose Arisen
Shrink shrank shrunk –
Bear - bore - borne
Begin began begun
Withdraw withdrew withdrawn
Drink drank drunk

Point 2.
Quote:
Because they modify nouns in PAST. That is why they are PAST participles.
—could you Pl clarify what exactly you mean by calling nouns in the past. Does a noun have a present, past or future?

Well! According to me nope; First thing is that the grammar book you have quoted does not connect past participle with past tense; it connects participle only with passive voice. Passive voice can be expressed both in present and past tense.

Should a past participle be connected only with past tense or can it be connected with present tense also? Let’s see.

Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal was angry
Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal is angry
Both the above are perfectly legal sentences. Few more examples

Targeted by aspirants of management studies in the US mainly, the GMAT is a bench mark test.
Targeted mainly for its affluence in the medieval era, India was battered by a series of raids by the Mediterranean empires.

Similarly, can a present participle using a verb+ing form be used both in present tens and past tense?’

Eg: Rising early in the morning, I go for a brisk walk every day;
Rising early in the morning, I used to go for a brisk walk in my young

Dropping out from the business school, the shrewd man entered business to biome one of the legends in the history of world.

Dropping out form their primary schools because of abject poverty, many wasted children in the third world countries are becoming a burden to the society

It must now clear that present participle or past participles do not refer to the tense of the sentence; they are just lexical jargons IMO. In essence, they are in fact, timeless and tenseless expressions.

_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3857
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 822

Kudos [?]: 6337 [0], given: 324

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2011, 04:35
For all my writings, I am myself the source. You are welcome to take them or leave them
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 144
Location: So. CA
WE 1: 2 IT
WE 2: 4 Software Analyst
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2011, 22:48
joshnsit wrote:
Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

I selected A for the demand of "Past Participle" in the sentence (and selected A) rather than a "Present Participle" (and selecting E).

Can you tell why you used Present Participle instead of Past Participle?

Doesn't (A) have a modifier problem, here you have "comma + traveled", modifying agent, when it should be modifying Frederick Douglass?
Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
Posts: 208
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q44 V39
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2011, 04:11
One more for E. Traveling and Exhorting are parallel.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2011, 07:18
daagh
Your last 2 posts make complete sense now. The below link + last chapter on "Grammar for Teachers" has helped a lot.

joshnsit wrote:
@daagh
I am trying to climb the ropes. From your explanations, for :
Point 1, Can we conclude that past participle will take the third form of verb whenever take place in past participle phrase to modify subsequesnt noun? Obviously, we need not to consider the phrases with -ing forms of participle.
So we are good here...

Point 2
From Noun, I meant the noun which will be modified by the past participial phrase. By PAST, I meant nouns getting worked upon by main verbs in past as in timeframe.
And that is why, I am kind of not sure of this sentence "Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal is angry"
If you can confirm the source for the above sentence, it would definitely be clear that participial phrases can modify Nouns in past as well as present timeframes.

Question Time
As said in my last post, my grammar book source "Grammar for Teachers" said that applicability of past participial phrases comes from Passive structure in phrase(not the main sentence). I tried to look into internet more for this, but to no avail.
Your sample sentence however deviates from this rule setup, which again forces me to ask for the source of the below illustrated sentence. I feel like I have seen it in some GMAT book, but cant recollect it.
Targeted mainly for its affluence in the medieval era, India was battered by a series of raids by the Mediterranean empires.

daagh wrote:
joshnsit wrote

Quote:
Point 1. "Past participles will always take the form of simple past ",
-- Do they always take the form of simple Past? Look at the following past participial forms.
Eat - ate - eaten
Eg: Eaten in the Mediterranean, tomatoes were once considered dangerous plants by Europeans

Here are some more examples of past participles in non past-tense forms. Please note that these past participles can not function as past tense verbs. There are so many more.
Arise Arose Arisen
Shrink shrank shrunk –
Bear - bore - borne
Begin began begun
Withdraw withdrew withdrawn
Drink drank drunk

Point 2.
Quote:
Because they modify nouns in PAST. That is why they are PAST participles.
—could you Pl clarify what exactly you mean by calling nouns in the past. Does a noun have a present, past or future?

Well! According to me nope; First thing is that the grammar book you have quoted does not connect past participle with past tense; it connects participle only with passive voice. Passive voice can be expressed both in present and past tense.

Should a past participle be connected only with past tense or can it be connected with present tense also? Let’s see.

Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal was angry
Annoyed by the student behavior, the principal is angry
Both the above are perfectly legal sentences. Few more examples

Targeted by aspirants of management studies in the US mainly, the GMAT is a bench mark test.
Targeted mainly for its affluence in the medieval era, India was battered by a series of raids by the Mediterranean empires.

Similarly, can a present participle using a verb+ing form be used both in present tens and past tense?’

Eg: Rising early in the morning, I go for a brisk walk every day;
Rising early in the morning, I used to go for a brisk walk in my young

Dropping out from the business school, the shrewd man entered business to biome one of the legends in the history of world.

Dropping out form their primary schools because of abject poverty, many wasted children in the third world countries are becoming a burden to the society

It must now clear that present participle or past participles do not refer to the tense of the sentence; they are just lexical jargons IMO. In essence, they are in fact, timeless and tenseless expressions.

_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

08 May 2011, 13:44
gtr022001 wrote:
joshnsit wrote:
Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent, traveled through the North to exhort Black men to join the Union army.
(A) traveled through the North to exhort
(B) and he traveled through the North and exhorted
(C) and traveling through the North exhorted
(D) traveling through the North and exhorted
(E) traveling through the North and exhorting

I selected A for the demand of "Past Participle" in the sentence (and selected A) rather than a "Present Participle" (and selecting E).

Can you tell why you used Present Participle instead of Past Participle?

Doesn't (A) have a modifier problem, here you have "comma + traveled", modifying agent, when it should be modifying Frederick Douglass?

@gtr022001
If "Comma + traveled" has modifier problem, then with the same logic, it would be the case with "comma + travelling" with E also, which is OA.

@Daagh
I understand that it is a problem with identification of a participle qualifying a main clause with main purpose verb as specified by you in earlier post (which is "Frederick Douglass served as a recruiting agent" here). My question here is how should we identify whether Past Participle or Present Participle will fit in, when either of them can be used as modifier.

I am assuming "secondary purpose verb" as(=) "participle" as per our defining lingo.

How do you define the perference of "travelling" over "traveled" as secondary purpose verb/participle, when both of them can be used for modifying the primary purpose verb?
I hope we cant select a form of secondary purpose verb/participle just for the sake of parallelism(travelling and exhorting) which seems to be existent in E.
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 144
Location: So. CA
WE 1: 2 IT
WE 2: 4 Software Analyst
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

15 May 2011, 15:59
here is a different take on the question: frederick-douglass-94409.html
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 408
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 34

### Show Tags

15 May 2011, 17:42
gtr022001 wrote:
here is a different take on the question: frederick-douglass-94409.html

How is it different? How does it get rid of choice A?
I am still looking for exact explanation. SC Gurus... Kindly help..
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Re: SC: Frederick Douglas   [#permalink] 15 May 2011, 17:42

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 27 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Everyone needs to adopt himself 7 26 Apr 2017, 17:51
2 Frederick Douglass' belief in Abraham Lincoln was of him being without 12 17 Mar 2016, 01:09
3 A one-million-year-old skull bearing traits associated both 7 25 May 2017, 03:01
9 Too old to bear arms himself, Frederick Douglass served as a 10 19 Jul 2015, 08:44
13 Except for a concert performance that the composer himself 11 04 Apr 2017, 23:15
Display posts from previous: Sort by