comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

by **MichaelZ337** Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:43 pm

Hi Ron

I have learned that the "comma-ing clause" is used to modify the preceding whole sentence. It can provide additional explanation of the preceding sentence or can show result of the proceding sentence.

But the below GMAT sentence is deemed incorrect. Could you explain why?

Even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to........, already stimulating international disputes....

This sentence means: The fact that tiny islets can be basis for claims results in some international disputes. What is wrong with it?

Thank you!

by **RonPurewal** Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:52 am

read this post, along with the one after it:
post111213.html#p111213

that will explain what's wrong here.
for the reasons detailed in that post, for comma+__ing to work here, you'd need to have the code of laws (or whatever actually lets tiny islets be the basis for claims) as the subject.

by **MichaelZ337** Wed Apr 01, 2015 7:30 am

HI Ron, very clear and sensible instruction. Thank you!

by **MichaelZ337** Wed Apr 01, 2015 7:22 pm

Hi Ron

I've got a follow up question. If the main sentence is in passive voice, for example:

A is done by B, resulting C....

Is A or B the most responsible one for resulting C?

Thank you

by **RonPurewal** Fri Apr 03, 2015 4:15 am

you're unlikely to see such a construction in any correct sentence, so it's not really worth the time to think about that issue.

if you can find a specific instance of such a thing--ideally in one of GMAC's problems--please post a question about it.

by **MichaelZ337** Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:01 am

Hi Ron

I have a follow up question:

In OG 13 - Diagnostic test - SC 49, in the correct answer C, the clause introduced by "training" is intended to show a causal relationship, but the fact that Stella is an artist cannot cause the fact that she trained someone.

Where am I wrong? thank you!

by **MichaelZ337** Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:33 am

Hi Ron

In OG 13 - Diag - SC #49, the correct answer used the comma + verb-ing clause. I remember that this structure either showed how the action of the main clause happened or showed result of the main clause. But I think neither could be applied to this question. Could you please let me know where I am wrong?

Thank you!

by **RonPurewal** Sun Apr 26, 2015 5:24 am

https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p113595

DO NOT post the same question in more than one place. thank you.

by **MichaelZ337** Wed Apr 29, 2015 7:12 am

Thank you for your answer. I was told by the forum that my post could not be submitted, so I submitted again and again. It's probably the internet problem that day.

Anyway, Sorry! I should have checked whether these posts are successfully posted and deleted the duplicates!

by **RonPurewal** Wed May 06, 2015 8:53 pm

if you see that ^^ then your post is probably "waiting for approval".

it's difficult to say what may have caused that. most likely, your original post contained some innocent-looking words that have appeared too many times in past spam posts. (in other words, it's probably not your fault.)

in any case, going forward, that's probably the deal, and your post will be "approved" at our earliest convenience. thanks.

comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence

Re: comma ing - used to modify the whole preceding sentence