A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989

[thanghnvn]

Ron, Manhantan experts, pls confirm the following

comma +"with phrase" can modify immediately preceding noun(as adjective) or preceding clause( as adverb). I see many question in og in which comma+with phrase modify preceding noun.

comma+doing only modify preceding clause, NEVER modify preceding noun. This point is the reason choice A in the origian question of this thread is wrong. "possibly resulting ..." modifies "creatures are suffering..." illogically.

is my thinking correct?

[RonPurewal]

Ron, Manhantan experts, pls confirm the following

comma +"with phrase" can modify immediately preceding noun(as adjective) or preceding clause( as adverb). I see many question in og in which comma+with phrase modify preceding noun.

seems correct.

comma+doing only modify preceding clause, NEVER modify preceding noun. This point is the reason choice A in the origian question of this thread is wrong. "possibly resulting ..." modifies "creatures are suffering..." illogically.

is my thinking correct?

if "comma + verbING" follows a clause, then this is correct. (one exception is "including", which isn't really a verbING form; "including" generally follows the rules for prepositions instead.)

on the other hand, if "comma + verbING" just follows a noun, then it modifies only that noun.
the two injured birds, flapping their wings frantically, looked for a safe place to land.
--> here, "flapping..." modifies the birds.

[gmatango]

on the other hand, if "comma + verbING" just follows a noun, then it modifies only that noun.
the two injured birds, flapping their wings frantically, looked for a safe place to land.
--> here, "flapping..." modifies the birds.

Hi Ron,

The above logic differs from what you stated in a post here http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the-yield-per-acre-of-coffee-berries-varies-enormously-in-t649.html.


The yield per acre of coffee berries varies enormously, because a single tree, depending on its size and on climate and altitude, is able to produce enough berries to make between one and twelve pounds of dried beans a year.

Could you please clarify whether a verbing when inserted in between a clause before a noun modifier the preceding noun or the whole clause.

Many thanks

[davetzulin]

on the other hand, if "comma + verbING" just follows a noun, then it modifies only that noun.
the two injured birds, flapping their wings frantically, looked for a safe place to land.
--> here, "flapping..." modifies the birds.

Hi Ron,

The above logic differs from what you stated in a post here http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the-yield-per-acre-of-coffee-berries-varies-enormously-in-t649.html.


The yield per acre of coffee berries varies enormously, because a single tree, depending on its size and on climate and altitude, is able to produce enough berries to make between one and twelve pounds of dried beans a year.

Could you please clarify whether a verbing when inserted in between a clause before a noun modifier the preceding noun or the whole clause.

Many thanks

my two cents...always in deference to the instructors

I think this is a special case because the clause uses a linking verb.
If you recall the "due to" vs "because of" distinction where "due to" is an adjectival modifier and "because of" is a adverbial then it makes sense.

his pain was due to the scar <-- so you use an "adjectival" modifier even though there is a verb, "was". so the reality is even though the modifier is after the verb, you are modifying the noun because adjectives modify nouns.

so in this case your modifier "depending..." is probably the same idea even though its position is different.

in any case, if you move the modifier around to try and modify the clause or the noun it makes sense regardless. it should since the verb links the noun so i almost think of it like they are one and the same.

[mylittled2008]

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

First of all, we should understand what the author want to tell us. A study revealed that xx because xxx.
We crossed out D & E because of "that".
Actually, in my opinion, B and C don't have grammatical flaws. The difference between B and C is the modifier of supplies. When B is compared with C, the original meaning can be more clearly conveyed.
A. the comma makes "possibly resulting from..." modifies "the seabed were suffering from...". wrong.

[gts.sunflower]

A is wrong, because "resulting" seems to be modifying "a study of...".

Could this be a correct explanation?

[tim]

on the other hand, if "comma + verbING" just follows a noun, then it modifies only that noun.
the two injured birds, flapping their wings frantically, looked for a safe place to land.
--> here, "flapping..." modifies the birds.

Hi Ron,

The above logic differs from what you stated in a post here http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the-yield-per-acre-of-coffee-berries-varies-enormously-in-t649.html.


The yield per acre of coffee berries varies enormously, because a single tree, depending on its size and on climate and altitude, is able to produce enough berries to make between one and twelve pounds of dried beans a year.

Could you please clarify whether a verbing when inserted in between a clause before a noun modifier the preceding noun or the whole clause.

Many thanks

i would argue that "flapping" modifies "looked" just as "depending" modifies "is". of course, Ron may have a different interpretation, and if he does i would contend that we're both "right" in the sense that both of our interpretations will help us get to the correct answer. choose whichever interpretation will help you get to the correct answer as well.. :)

[tim]

A is wrong, because "resulting" seems to be modifying "a study of...".

Could this be a correct explanation?

it's really not clear what "resulting" is modifying, and that's a big part of the problem.. :)

[vikram4689]

isn't this issue already solved because "resulting from" in A is inherently wrong. see post10569.html#p10569

[tim]

that's what i was getting at. it's usually wrong because it cannot be determined what the phrase is modifying.. :)

[duyng9989]

Source GMAT Prep
How to chose between b and c?

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.


a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

I am sorry to come back to this old post. But the actual GMAT prep question in choice A is not " resulting from" but " possibly a result from increasing". Might be GMAC has changed the question.

(Please see the attached picture from GMAT prep software)
http://s187.photobucket.com/user/duy89p ... e.png.html

The answer is still B.

GMAT prep explained that in A, "possibly a result from increasing" cause confusion because it can modify food or creature of seabed.

I dont understand?

Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

GMAT prep explained that in A, "possibly a result from increasing" cause confusion because it can modify food or creature of seabed.

I dont understand?

Thank you.

i see where they're going with that, but i think it's more a result of the placement of the things before the comma.

in particular, note the difference between the things preceding the comma in choices (a) and (b). (remember, always concentrate on the differences between choices, not just on the objective content of the choices!)
in (a), you've got "... suffering from dwindling food supplies" all in one phrase. on the other hand, in (b), they separate the ideas into entirely different clauses: "... xxxxxx because food supplies were dwindling".
so, what the gmac people seem to be implying (and what seems reasonable to me, too) is that this separation makes it more clear in (b) that the reduction in food supplies is the "result" we're talking about here.

--

by the way, there are a couple of other things going on there, too.

* the correct idiom is "a result of...", not "a result from ...".
("result from..." is only ok when "result" is a verb. here, "result" is a noun.)
this may also explain gmac's motivation behind changing answer choice (a): by turning "result" into a noun, they've introduced another objective error into that choice.

... and there's something else you can notice, too, even if you aren't familiar with the idiom above:
* right now, choice (a) says "suffering from ... food supplies". (note that this is the core structure. yes, "dwindling" is there, but it doesn't change the core structure.)
that doesn't make sense. it's not the food supplies themselves that are causing the creatures to suffer; it's the fact that they are dwindling.

some more examples along the same lines:

Ray was sad because of his favorite shoes, which had been stolen from his car
--> not sensible

Ray was sad because of his stolen shoes
--> not sensible

Ray was sad because his favorite shoes had been stolen from his car
--> this makes sense.

Ray was sad because of the theft of his favorite shoes (from his car)
--> this makes sense.

[ashish-mohan]

Hello Ron, as one of the posters earlier remarked:

One can suffer from Cholera
One can suffer from fever
But, One can't suffer from dwindling food supplies!!

[tim]

Please let us know if you have a question about this one.

[HanzZ]

Well I had memorized this rule until I saw this question in MGMAT tests

that is not a counterexample to the rule that i posted above; please read my post more carefully.
in my post, i stated that you will not see the words "resulting FROM" after a comma.
that statement was particular to this combination of two words; other combinations, such as "resulting IN", are quite possible.

Hello Ron,

Can I interpret the discussion this way:

A happened, resulting in B --> B is a direct consequence of A so using participle here makes sense (possibly B agrees with the subject of A)

However,

A happened, resulting from B --> Somehow it feels like the logic is reversed, at least in terms of A and B's order in the sentence?

This leads to my next question: would it work if we move 'resulting from' up front?

In your example:

Resulting from the abnormally strong storms, the flooding had left six inches of standing water in the street.

Can 'resulting from' modify the main clause now?

Thanks a lot!