Present Participle vs Present progressive tense (OG Q)

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

Ron/Stacey.....

I have modified the sentence because of copyright issues.

Beanie Todd, in her book illustrations, carefully coordinating them with her narrations, capitalized on her ....

OG says that "use of the present progressive form of the verb confuses the sequence of time with respect to the past tense of the main verb capitalized"...My question is that.....

"coordinating" is present participle and "capitalized" is past tense or (past participle ??? not sure.I think it's past tense)..... Why is OG saying "present progressive form of the verb confuses the sequence of time with respect to the past tense of the main verb"....???

Can anyone please help me ? OG-105/12th edition.

Thanks
Voodoo

[tim]

Because it DOES confuse the timing. It makes it sound like coordinating is happening in the present but she capitalized in the past. This does not make logical sense..

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

Because it DOES confuse the timing. It makes it sound like coordinating is happening in the present but she capitalized in the past. This does not make logical sense..

Thanks Tim. But my question is that I want to understand why "coordinating" is present progressive tense, as per OG ?

Thanks
Voodoo

[tim]

it isn't. "coordinating" is a present participle, not present progressive, in the answer choices. either way, it's still a problem because it mixes up the timing..

[josefdong]

it isn't. "coordinating" is a present participle, not present progressive, in the answer choices. either way, it's still a problem because it mixes up the timing..

Hi tutors, I've been trapped by this OG explanation, too.

I've learned from Manhattan SC Guide that "Present Participles get their tense from the main verb of the sentence", and here, capitalized is a past tense, so coordinating should also be a past tense. Why OG said "this usage confuses the sequence of time with respect to the past tense of the main verb capitalized?"

Thank you very much.

[RonPurewal]

Like many (but, thankfully, not most) OG explanations, that one is ... wrong.
Your understanding of the time function of __ing modifiers is perfectly correct.

[soulwangh]

it isn't. "coordinating" is a present participle, not present progressive, in the answer choices. either way, it's still a problem because it mixes up the timing..

Hi tutors, I've been trapped by this OG explanation, too.

I've learned from Manhattan SC Guide that "Present Participles get their tense from the main verb of the sentence", and here, capitalized is a past tense, so coordinating should also be a past tense. Why OG said "this usage confuses the sequence of time with respect to the past tense of the main verb capitalized?"

Thank you very much.

Hi, Ron

--- deleted ---
Do not quote OG material directly.[/quote]


1/
According to one of Stacy's Post, I think the usage indeed confuses the sequence of time, but it does not do so with respect to the past tense of the main verb.

I make the reason bold-face as follows.

Slipping on the ice, I fell and broke my ankle. (Ouch!)
--> I'm not just trying to say that *I* slipped on the ice. I'm trying to say that, as a result of slipping on the ice, *I fell.*

I slipped on the ice, breaking my ankle.
--> again, it's not just that I broke my ankle - it's that I broke it because I slipped.

Note that I wouldn't say:
I fell and broke my ankle, slipping on the ice.
Why not?
--> In general, there's a sequence to these constructions. The thing that's written first happens first, and the second thing happens after, as a result of, as a consequence of the first thing.

I think we should "capitalize" first, then we could "collaborate". A and B are wrong for this reason.
Please conform.

Is it the same reason you wrote in one post? Sorry, I cannot find the post, and thus, I do not know the context of your words.

" even if you interpret "carefully coordinating them..." as a modifier of the following clause, it doesn't make sense. specifically, it doesn't actually modify that clause: the fact that she coordinated her drawings with her stories has nothing to do with her love of the natural world."

2/ I can't figure out why E is wrong.
OE is "The participal phrase does not clearly modify book illustrations".
I know the logical meaning of E is not the same as the correct choice. But the intended meaning in this question is not obvious at first glance. The OE seems kind of Post hoc.

Please help.


Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

That interpretation of A/B is valid.

The problem with E is that "in her illustrations" is trying to modify "... coordinated them with xxxx". That's not what she did in her illustrations; that's what she did with/to them.

E.g.
Smith, in his two books, tells a story of oppression, courage, and redemption.
--> Makes sense.
Smith, in his two books, writes books about oppression, courage, and redemption.
--> Unless Smith actually narrates his writing of books -- i.e., he writes about writing books -- this is wrong.

[RonPurewal]

By the way, I've noticed that we're back to the original OG problem, which someone quoted verbatim (only changing "Beatrix Potter" to "B P").

Can't quote OG content here. So, (a) I deleted the offending content, and (b) the thread is now locked.