If as a modifier?

[sir_imran]

If as a noun modifier?

I am looking for some clarification on when "if" acts as a modifier? Does anyone have any material on this. There is nothing in the SC Guide.

I believe it is correct to say that "if" does not act as a modifier in "if-then" constructions. I also know that subordinators modify verbs and that "if" may be a subordinator.

The following sentence caught me off guard. I did not know that "if" can act as a Noun Modifier. Apparently "if" incorrectly modifies "one reason" in the following text:

If used repeatedly in the same place, one reason that certain pesticides can become ineffective is suggested by the finding that there are much larger populations of pesticide-degrading microbes in soils with a relatively long history of pesticide use than in soils that are free of such chemicals.

Any help or guidance is appreciated.

[mschwrtz]

A sentence with this structure,
"IF adjective1, (THEN) subject linking verb adjective2."
can be glossed as,
"IF subject linking verb adjective1, (THEN) subject linking verb adjective2."
The subject and linking verb in the IF part are understood to be the very same as the subject and linking verb in the THEN part.

For instance the sentence,
"If unearned, rewards can undermine a child's respect for effort." can be glossed as,
"If (rewards are) unearned, rewards can undermine a child's respect for effort."

And the sentence,
"If used repeatedly..., one reason ... is suggested by ...."
can be glossed as,
"If one reason is used repeatedly...,one reason ... is suggested by ...."

But that's gibberish. You need to make "pesticides" the subject, since it is they which are used repeatedly.

Notice, by the way, that I simplified things a bit here by calling all noun modifiers adjectives. Of course "used repeatedly..." is a participial phrase.

[sir_imran]

Thank you very much ! That really clarifies it =)

[tim]

Glad to hear it!

[sumit_pune]

i have one question here..

in above sentence

---
If used repeatedly in the same place, one reason that certain pesticides can become ineffective is suggested by the finding that there are much larger populations of pesticide-degrading microbes in soils with a relatively long history of pesticide use than in soils that are free of such chemicals.
---

is comparison is correct ?

there are much larger populations of pesticide-degrading microbes in soils with a relatively long history of pesticide use than in soils that are free of such chemicals.

I think , it should be like

there are much larger populations of pesticide-degrading microbes in soils with a relatively long history of pesticide use than those in soils that are free of such chemicals.

can anyone explain ?

[tim]

Well, "in soils" is perfectly parallel to "in soils". Remember, you shouldn’t get rid of an answer choice just because you prefer an alternate wording. If the choice doesn’t violate any grammar rules, leave it alone..

[rajesh.shroff]

HI,
I have a question about such problems where the whole sentence is underlined (and felt this is a very good eg. for the same).
When the whole sentence is underlined, is it worth to look for the splits (I started with that and got lost midway)? Is it ok to start with each choice individually and go on eliminating based on its flaws?

The reason I ask is because:
1. I did get the right answer but,
2. I started to find splits, then gave up half way.
3. then went over each choice and found the answer.
But got the right answer in about 3 mins.

So I want to confirm if I was better off starting with 3rd point itself.

Please comment.

[jlucero]

HI,
I have a question about such problems where the whole sentence is underlined (and felt this is a very good eg. for the same).
When the whole sentence is underlined, is it worth to look for the splits (I started with that and got lost midway)? Is it ok to start with each choice individually and go on eliminating based on its flaws?

The reason I ask is because:
1. I did get the right answer but,
2. I started to find splits, then gave up half way.
3. then went over each choice and found the answer.
But got the right answer in about 3 mins.

So I want to confirm if I was better off starting with 3rd point itself.

Please comment.

There's no 1 perfect way of doing any GMAT problem. Some people love coming up with algebraic equations, others prefer plugging in numbers. I'm never one to tell a student to change their method as long as they can get an answer efficiently. So your question is one that's impossible to answer. And I bet that if you polled GMAT instructors, you would find that very few of them do the exact same thing on every SC question. So ultimately, it's about finding what works best for you.

Personally, I will use splits if I see them- especially when there's only a few words underlined. But in the some of the longer/harder SC problems, there's too many words underlined to be able to find each and every split. So I look at the original and try to find an error with it. If I am able to find an error in an answer choice, then I go and look for the same error in other sentences. Because even when it's difficult to see the splits, they are often still present in long SC questions.

But again, it's ultimately your call. Practice looking for splits. Then practice reading through the original answer choice and searching for errors. If you can do both (which comes from lots of practice and lots of review), then you'll be comfortable to attack different questions in different (and efficient) ways on test day.