Because there are provisions.....

[divineacclivity]

Stacy,

I need your expert inputs here please.

Does an "..-ing" modifier (e.g. , applying part of the rent..) modify the entire clause/action ALWAYS?
Could it modify the noun it just touches? Can you quote examples?
Could it modify anything other than the action?
"Amy talked to Harry, walking on one leg" - Who must be walking on one leg in this case? If -ing modifier always modifies the action then the sentence would mean "Amy talks as she walks". Otherwise, it could also mean Harry was walking on one leg. Please clarify.

thanks

Divine

Do comma + ing modifiers have to be "connected" to the clause that they modify or can they "jump" over any words or clauses?

For example: Question number 55 from the OG12.
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs, which enables a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into a new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.

Could "applying" jump over the non-essential phrase starting with "which", if it made sense, and modify the clause "Many house builders offer".

Thank you for your help

[jnelson0612]

Stacy,

I need your expert inputs here please.

Does an "..-ing" modifier (e.g. , applying part of the rent..) modify the entire clause/action ALWAYS?
Could it modify the noun it just touches? Can you quote examples?
Could it modify anything other than the action?
"Amy talked to Harry, walking on one leg" - Who must be walking on one leg in this case? If -ing modifier always modifies the action then the sentence would mean "Amy talks as she walks". Otherwise, it could also mean Harry was walking on one leg. Please clarify.

thanks

Divine

Do comma + ing modifiers have to be "connected" to the clause that they modify or can they "jump" over any words or clauses?

For example: Question number 55 from the OG12.
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs, which enables a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into a new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.

Could "applying" jump over the non-essential phrase starting with "which", if it made sense, and modify the clause "Many house builders offer".

Thank you for your help

Hi!

The "-ing" modifier can modify a noun or the clause.

Some examples:
The dog running around the house is mine.
(here "running" modifies the noun "dog")

I threw the plate, angering my husband.
(here "angering" modifies the clause before it and tells me the result of the clause)

Ron goes into more detail in this thread: adverbial-participles-ing-t11705.html

[divineacclivity]

Hi!

The "-ing" modifier can modify a noun or the clause.

Some examples:
The dog running around the house is mine.
(here "running" modifies the noun "dog")

I threw the plate, angering my husband.
(here "angering" modifies the clause before it and tells me the result of the clause)

Ron goes into more detail in this thread: adverbial-participles-ing-t11705.html

thanks Jamie,

could you also please clarify it in context of the following sentence:

"Amy talked to Harry, walking on one leg" - In this sentence, who must be walking on one leg in this case? If -ing modifier always modifies the action then the sentence would mean "Amy talks as she walks". Otherwise, it could also mean Harry was walking on one leg. Please clarify.

thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

"Amy talked to Harry, walking on one leg" - In this sentence, who must be walking on one leg in this case? If -ing modifier always modifies the action then the sentence would mean "Amy talks as she walks". Otherwise, it could also mean Harry was walking on one leg. Please clarify.

thanks in advance.

i already answered this here:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/modifier-iss ... tml#506455

please don't double-post these questions, thanks.

[yejiuying333]

hi everyone,
I have two questions that no one mentioned before. They are quite basic, but they confuse me a lot.
Can anyone help me with them?

(1)Why can "it" in OA correctly refer to "code" and create no ambiguity? Why can't it refer to other singular noun such as "basis"? People understand it from the meaning of the author?

(2)The construction of C confuse me. I have always thought that "Even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas under provisions of the new maritime code" is not a complete sentence because of "even". For me, a "even" works as "although" and makes the sentence modifier.

Thanks& Lots of regards
Camilla

[tim]

(1) because "it" is the subject of its clause, it most logically matches with the subject in the previous clause. failure to recognize this is one of the most common ways that students make the mistake of assuming pronouns are ambiguous when they really aren't..

(2) "even" is not at all like "although"..

[divineacclivity]

1. In the following sentence, would "it" still refer to the subject?

Because the new maritime code provides that even a tiny islet can be the basis for the claim to the fishery and the oil field of large sea area, it has already stimulated.

2. Now, I'm confused why "it" could NOT refer to "basis" in the original sentence (answer choice B).

thank you very much, Ron.

[tim]

i think my previous post answers both of your questions. please let me know if it doesn't..

[divineacclivity]

Hi,

Please note that I changed the sentence a little. Also, I still don't understand the "why" part of it. Could you please elaborate more on the answers to the following queries? thank you so much in advance

1. I'm confused why "it" could NOT refer to "basis" in the original sentence (answer choice B).

2. In the following sentence (I changed it a little), would "it" still refer to the subject?

Because the new maritime code provides that even a tiny islet can be the basis for the claim to the fishery and the oil field of large sea area, it has already stimulated.

[jlucero]

Hi,

Please note that I changed the sentence a little. Also, I still don't understand the "why" part of it. Could you please elaborate more on the answers to the following queries? thank you so much in advance

1. I'm confused why "it" could NOT refer to "basis" in the original sentence (answer choice B).

2. In the following sentence (I changed it a little), would "it" still refer to the subject?

Because the new maritime code provides that even a tiny islet can be the basis for the claim to the fishery and the oil field of large sea area, it has already stimulated.

1. While there can be several subjects of clauses in sentences, there can only be one main clause with one main subject:

Because the new maritime code provides X (that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas), it has already...

2. Notice your example changes what's in my ( ), but since the CORE of the opening clause stays the same, the subject stays the same, and "it" still refers back to "the new maritime code"

[divineacclivity]

1. While there can be several subjects of clauses in sentences, there can only be one main clause with one main subject:

Because the new maritime code provides X (that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas), it has already...

2. Notice your example changes what's in my ( ), but since the CORE of the opening clause stays the same, the subject stays the same, and "it" still refers back to "the new maritime code"

Ok, thanks Joe, I'll memorize this one & please let me get back to you incase I have a confusion around a similar sentence/usage because I've seen many SC questions on which we reject wrong options on the basis of incorrect/ambiguous pronoun references but since I wasn't aware of this rule, I didn't really check this part. Thank you very much for your help.

[jlucero]

Glad it helped!

[523128572]

I have understood that the adverbial modifer- already simulating" could modify object (maritime code), or whole preceding clause.

nope. no way.

COMMA + -ING is always an adverbial modifier; it always modifiers the preceding CLAUSE.

that's sufficient to eliminate this choice.

but ron, does the part"COMMA + -ING " play a role in the sentense to show that the v-ing accurs at the same time with the verb in the main clause or to show that it is the result of the main clause? i am quite confused .hope for your reply

[523128572]

"Amy talked to Harry, walking on one leg" - In this sentence, who must be walking on one leg in this case? If -ing modifier always modifies the action then the sentence would mean "Amy talks as she walks". Otherwise, it could also mean Harry was walking on one leg. Please clarify.

thanks in advance.

i already answered this here:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/modifier-iss ... tml#506455

please don't double-post these questions, thanks.

ron, look at the following 2 questions:
1. Mixed with an equal part of water, ethylene glycol, a compound commonly used as an automotive antifreeze, is effective at temperatures as low as -30 degrees Fahrenheit.
A. temperatures as low
B. temperatures so low
C. as low temperatures
D. as few
E. as little
OA A
2. The Environmental Protection Agency frequently puts mandatory controls on toxic substances that present as little risk as one in a million chances to cause cancer.
(A) as little risk as one in a million chances to cause
(B) as little risk as one chance in a million of causing
(C) as little risk as one chance in a million that it will cause
(D) a risk as little as one chance in a million for causing
(E) a risk as little as one chance in a million for it to cause
OA B
in the first one, the answer gives the explanation that in C, there is no object after "at".However, in the second one, the answer is B and why B this time is correct?why don't we say there is no object after "present"? this question has confused me for a long time.hope for your reply!!!

[divineacclivity]

ron, look at the following 2 questions:
1. Mixed with an equal part of water, ethylene glycol, a compound commonly used as an automotive antifreeze, is effective at temperatures as low as -30 degrees Fahrenheit.
A. temperatures as low
B. temperatures so low
C. as low temperatures
D. as few
E. as little
OA A
2. The Environmental Protection Agency frequently puts mandatory controls on toxic substances that present as little risk as one in a million chances to cause cancer.
(A) as little risk as one in a million chances to cause
(B) as little risk as one chance in a million of causing
(C) as little risk as one chance in a million that it will cause
(D) a risk as little as one chance in a million for causing
(E) a risk as little as one chance in a million for it to cause
OA B
in the first one, the answer gives the explanation that in C, there is no object after "at".However, in the second one, the answer is B and why B this time is correct?why don't we say there is no object after "present"? this question has confused me for a long time.hope for your reply!!!

hey, here, "at" is a preposition and "present" is a verb. The two can not be compared.

I have a small follow up question for Ron here:
Ron, would the following two mean exactly the same thing:
<something> presents as little risk as one in a million chances to cause cancer.
<something> presents a risk as little as one in a million chances to cause cancer.
thanks in advance