On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punish

[danli311]

"Contemporaneous" doesn't really pass muster here, either. The situation described in the sentence could obtain at any point after 1933 -- even decades later -- as long as the law stayed in effect.

In the example you cited, note that the things in the modifier (plummeting costs and increasingly common cell phones) pertain reasonably directly to the "people" that follow the modifier. Those people are paying the (decreasing) costs, and those people are more and more commonly using cell phones.
The same is not true for the immigrants here. They have nothing to do with the passage of the law.

wow...crystal clear.Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

What's interesting here is that I'm learning new things, too -- in fact, as much as you are.
I'm a professional writer and editor, so I can just look at things and know intuitively whether they're correct or incorrect. (As an analogy, you wouldn't need more than 2 or 3 seconds to tell whether a speaker of your language is a native or a foreigner.)
So, most of your questions are things I've never thought about explicitly -- until now. Fascinating.

[gauravtyagigmat]

On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
B. With a law passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment that a United States citizen hold
C. A law passed in 1933 that made it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen holding
D. Because of a law passed in 1933 making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold
E. Due to a law being passed in 1933 that makes it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a United States citizen to hold




'with' in choice b is also bad: it seems to imply that immigrants arrived with the law in their hands.

choice c implies that the immigrants themselves are 'a law passed in 19xx' (analogy: 'an accomplished pianist, jay made a nice living playing at weddings' - jay is an accomplished pianist. same reading applies to this sentence, although it's considerably longer and more difficult to parse)

with reference to your answer about option c
I am not able to get how c implies that the immigrants themselves are 'a law passed in 19xx'
I am a not native speaker of english language.It becomes really difficult to graps that sentence is intending incorrect meaning when modifiers are long.

I am also not clear with the option B explaintion of usage of 'with'.I have also gone through the post of saptadeepc but still it is not getting clear

Kindly explain how you do it when we have long modifiers in sentence.

This question may sound silly and irrevelant to this question but sir i need to know this technique.If you want I can post it somewhere else.I posted here because my concern got highlighted in your answer and we have question already posted here for reference

[RonPurewal]

with reference to your answer about option c
I am not able to get how c implies that the immigrants themselves are 'a law passed in 19xx'

Consider the example I gave:
An accomplished pianist, Jay made his living playing at weddings.
An accomplished pianist, with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized, Jay made his living playing at weddings.

If you understand these, then you can also understand choice C. The principle is the same.

[RonPurewal]

I am also not clear with the option B explaintion of usage of 'with'.I have also gone through the post of saptadeepc but still it is not getting clear

My best attempts at explaining choice B are on page 4 on this thread.
I can't do any better than those. If those posts don't make sense, you may just want to let that part go for now.

[RonPurewal]

I am a not native speaker of english language.It becomes really difficult to graps that sentence is intending incorrect meaning when modifiers are long.

For native speakers, the challenge is the same.

The principles themselves are never very complicated. The challenge comes from (a) the length of the sentences and (b) the large quantity of things woven together -- regardless of whether English is your native language.

Written English is not anyone's native language, so this issue is in fact entirely irrelevant. (People who speak English are not naturally better at parsing long written sentences. Totally different skill sets.)

[RonPurewal]

Kindly explain how you do it when we have long modifiers in sentence.

1/
Same reasoning as for short modifiers.

2/
Exposure. (The more English you read, the better you'll be at understanding this stuff.)

It's the same in mathematics.
For instance, if you know that
x^2 - 3x - 10 = (x - 5)(x + 2)
then you can also figure out that
(2x - 4y + 5)^2 - 3(2x - 4y + 5) - 10 = (2x - 4y)(2x - 4y + 7).
The principle is clearly the same; the only superficial difference is that (2x - 4y + 5) has been substituted for x. But there are lots and lots of people who can easily do the first, but not the second.

In fact, one thing that's true for the entire GMAT exam is that the concepts tested on it are never complicated. The complexity comes only from the way in which those concepts are combined and/or disguised.

[gauravtyagigmat]

with reference to your answer about option c
I am not able to get how c implies that the immigrants themselves are 'a law passed in 19xx'

Consider the example I gave:
An accomplished pianist, Jay made his living playing at weddings.
An accomplished pianist, with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized, Jay made his living playing at weddings.

If you understand these, then you can also understand choice C. The principle is the same.

:( sorry but I cant figure out the exact meaning of second sentence.Acc to me "with..memorized " and "an accomplished pianist" are modifier and sentence will be better in following form


with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized, Jay, An accomplished pianist, made his living playing at weddings

As far as "with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized" is concern I didnt understand the exact meaning

[RonPurewal]

Your version also works. Both yours and mine are correct, so there's not much sense in trying to say which one is "better".

As far as "with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized" is concern I didnt understand the exact meaning

I can't tell what you are saying here. Are you saying that you don't know what the words mean? (If you know what the words mean, their significance in the sentence should be clear.)

[gauravtyagigmat]

Your version also works. Both yours and mine are correct, so there's not much sense in trying to say which one is "better".

As far as "with a repertoire of thousands of pieces memorized" is concern I didnt understand the exact meaning

I can't tell what you are saying here. Are you saying that you don't know what the words mean? (If you know what the words mean, their significance in the sentence should be clear.)

Please let me know if my understanding is correct

In option B
"with ....coins" is acting as modifier and it is modifiying immigrants (noun).
This implies that immigrants arrived with law passed.Which is incorrect

In option C
"A law passed...coins" is acting a modifier to immigrants.Immigrants are not law passed hence it is also wrong

[RonPurewal]

Yes.

[Suapplle]

I guess A is wrong because comma + ing modifies the entire previous clause.....

which is not the case here...

can someone please confirm.....

IMO we need making without comma.

yes. good observation.

Hi,Ron,I am confused about the usage of "comma+making" here.
as I see,"comma+verb-ing" serve as an adverb,it should modify the preceding clause,but "on account of a law passed in 1993" is a clause?I think it should modify "immigrants found that on arrival in the United States......".(well,the choice is still wrong)
maybe I am wrong,please clarify,thank you very much.

[RonPurewal]

If there's a subject+action in front of ", __ing" -- even if that subject+action doesn't take the form of a complete sentence -- then the same principle applies.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Manhattan instructor,
I have a small question about the choice A.
===================
If I changed the choice A to 'On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a US citizen to hold...'

Is it acceptable??

In my opinion, it's OK. 'making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a US citizen to hold.....bla bla ' works as a adv. modifier which modifies the action.

Please confirm,thanks!

There's still a problem with comma + "making". Remember that, when comma+ing follows an action, it describes that action (not just a noun).
So, "a law passed in 1993, making it ..." implies that being passed in 1993 caused the law to have this effect.

Also, I'm not sure whether GMAC would ever condone the use of "on account of", which seems too vague and/or informal for this kind of language.

[Suapplle]

Dear Manhattan instructor,
I have a small question about the choice A.
===================
If I changed the choice A to 'On account of a law passed in 1993, making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a US citizen to hold...'

Is it acceptable??

In my opinion, it's OK. 'making it a crime punishable by imprisonment for a US citizen to hold.....bla bla ' works as a adv. modifier which modifies the action.

Please confirm,thanks!

There's still a problem with comma + "making". Remember that, when comma+ing follows an action, it describes that action (not just a noun).
So, "a law passed in 1993, making it ..." implies that being passed in 1993 caused the law to have this effect.

Also, I'm not sure whether GMAC would ever condone the use of "on account of", which seems too vague and/or informal for this kind of language.

Hi,Ron,thanks for your explanation,I am still confused about the use of ",making it......" here. if the law was not passed, it would not be a crime to hold gold, so why this modifier is inappropriate? please clarify,thank you very much.