For the farmer who

[NehaM981]

hi

Sorry for bumping the post .

1. But cow = noun , provided = verb modifier and milked = verb modifier . Then how are the parallel ??

2. Provided and milked are active modifiers so why they are not written in v+ing form ??

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

1. But cow = noun , provided = verb modifier and milked = verb modifier . Then how are the parallel ??

if you are trying to put "cows" in parallel with "provided" and "milked", then you must be completely ignoring the meaning of the words.
there is no possible context in which those 3 ideas could sensibly be parallel!

REMEMBER—
the FIRST STEP of EVERY sentence correction problem is to FIGURE OUT WHAT THE SENTENCE IS ACTUALLY SAYING.
this includes any and all parallel structures. if you UNDERSTAND a sentence that contains a structure of the form "a, b, and c", then you will ALWAYS know EXACTLY what "a", "b", and "c" are.

before you ask any further questions about this problem:

• figure out EXACTLY what the sentence is supposed to be saying.

• then, think about which three ideas SHOULD be parallel. (what are "a", "b", and "c"?)

• then, please read through this ENTIRE discussion thread if you still have any questions. the parallelism in this problem is already explained exhaustively in this thread.

thank you.

[RichaChampion]

heh. it looks like choice (a) is an "indian trap"
seriously, not a joke.
if there is a single biggest issue in the grammar of second-language english speakers who happen to hail from india or pakistan, that issue is the drastic overuse of the "are ...ing" construction. (native speakers of english will recognize "are producing" at once as awkward.)

Sir, Can you please give additional explanation on the above. why is are....producing wrong? so that I can also think like native speakers in future.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

btw, I know all this →
When you use a COMMA -ING modifier after a clause**, you should actually satisfy TWO requirements:

1. the modifier should modify the action of the preceding clause;
2. The subject of the preceding clause should also make sense as the agent of the -ING action.

This sort of modifier should additionally satisfy TWO requirements:

1) It should apply most nearly to the subject of the preceding clause (as you've said); and, even more importantly,
2) It should have one of the following RELATIONSHIPS to that clause:
* Immediate consequence
* Simultaneous, but lower-priority, action

VERB + Ing Modifiers also take the tense of the Preceding clause.

[RonPurewal]

don't try to "think like a native speaker".

• first of all, that's not possible. non-native speakers can't develop the same set of instincts (in any language, not just english). even if they've spoken a language for 50 years, educated foreign speakers ultimately still sound and write like ... educated foreign speakers.

• second, GMAT SC contains just as many items that NATIVE speakers' instincts will get wrong.
especially with pronouns and modifiers, the way native english speakers TALK doesn't at all line up with the conventions of formal WRITTEN english.
... so, overall, being a native speaker doesn't even confer a significant advantage on this exam in the first place. (if it did, then SC wouldn't even be on the exam! the test is pretty heavily vetted for geographic neutrality.)

__

it's easier to eliminate that choice by realizing that the beginning doesn't work.

the only way it COULD work -- grammatically -- would be with the two "__ing" constructions as modifiers... but that's a ridiculous meaning (since those things have nothing at all to do with "keeping the cows cool").