Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes

[vietst]

Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes of styles from former eras; instead, designers of everything from cars to computer monitors have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape for its own sake.

(A) more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape
(B) more ergonomic, conformed to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape
(C) ergonomic, more conformed to the shape of the body and not to shape flaunted
(D) ergonomic, conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted
(E) ergonomic, conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape
OA is A. what is wrong with C?

[rschunti]

In this comparision of styles why option "D" is wrong? Or any other answer besides "A". Pls explain?

[RonPurewal]

Gone are the sharp edges and jutting planes of styles from former eras; instead, designers of everything from cars to computer monitors have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape for its own sake.

(A) more ergonomic, conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape
(B) more ergonomic, conformed to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape
(C) ergonomic, more conformed to the shape of the body and not to shape flaunted
(D) ergonomic, conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted
(E) ergonomic, conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape
OA is A. what is wrong with C?

first, examine the split between 'more ergonomic' and just 'ergonomic'. in this case, we must preserve the meaning of the original statement: the new design is more ergonomic than the old design. if we change this to just 'ergonomic', we're attaching an implication that the old design simply wasn't ergonomic (and that the new design, by contrast, is) - an unacceptable implication. that gets rid of answer choices c, d, and e right there.

another item to examine is parallelism. in this case, in the construction 'X rather than Y' (or its analogues, 'X and not Y' and 'more X than Y'), items X and Y must be parallel.
choice a: conforming... rather than flaunting... <-- good parallelism!
choice b: to the body's shape and not to flaunting shape <-- logically nonparallel and also awkward
choice c: can't use 'more' together with 'and not to' (these are exclusive constructions, sort of like 'both' and 'as well as': if you use one, then you can't use the other), so we don't need to consider the parallelism in the first place.
choice d: can't use 'more' together with 'rather than'; also, bad parallelism between to the body's shape and shape flaunted...
choice e: more to the shape... than flaunting... <-- nonparallel

in fact, the winning choice (a) is the ONLY choice that properly compares 'conforming' and 'flaunting' in parallel. all of the other constructions also change the meaning of the sentence via their alterations of the words.

[Guest]

Hi,

In the above post what is " conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape " modifying, Is it modifying the the Designers or the action verb "adopted" and why ?

Also if it is modifying either one then could you also kindly explain why is it not modifying the other one?

Thnx

[RonPurewal]

Hi,

In the above post what is " conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape " modifying, Is it modifying the the Designers or the action verb "adopted" and why ?

Also if it is modifying either one then could you also kindly explain why is it not modifying the other one?

Thnx

actually, it modifies "is more ergonomic."

when you have ING modifiers after commas - like this one - they generally modify the closest action. in this case, that's "is".
check out #71 in the og11th edition; the initial verb split depends upon the same principle. (please do not post details of that problem here, tyvm)

[Nakk_s]

Hi Ron,

I have read on this site that whenever we use "more" then we should also use "than" after it to make the comparison complete. But in this question it doesn't follow that usage.

My question is " X is more ergonomic than??"

Correct me if i have misunderstood the usage!

thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

I have read on this site that whenever we use "more" then we should also use "than" after it to make the comparison complete. But in this question it doesn't follow that usage.

My question is " X is more ergonomic than??"

Correct me if i have misunderstood the usage!

thanks!

here's a more refined version of the rule:

if you use "as many / as much / more / less" with a PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED QUANTITY (i.e., a quantity that is mentioned before the comparison has been made), then you can eliminate the subsequent use of "as" or "than".
this is what's happening in the correct answer here.

another example:
james had found over 50 words in the puzzle, but his brother found even more on the subsequent turn. --> note that we don't have to say "than" here, since the initial comparison value (50 words) has already been mentioned.

--

also, note that this is a non-issue on this particular problem, since none of the five choices uses "than" in the comparison at hand.

[adiagr]

first, examine the split between 'more ergonomic' and just 'ergonomic'. in this case, we must preserve the meaning of the original statement: the new design is more ergonomic than the old design. if we change this to just 'ergonomic', we're attaching an implication that the old design simply wasn't ergonomic (and that the new design, by contrast, is) - an unacceptable implication. that gets rid of answer choices c, d, and e right there.

Additionally in B, and D body's shape is wrong, like :

labor's unqualifying support. --> wrong

apostrophe to be used with Human/animals.

[RonPurewal]

Additionally in B, and D body's shape is wrong, like :

labor's unqualifying support. --> wrong

apostrophe to be used with Human/animals.

i would not make this claim with 100% certainty; "body's shape" sounds decent enough that it might appear in a correct answer, although i would not take it against "shape of the body".

in general, this is not the kind of thing that is going to be decisive, unless the apostrophe form is extremely awkward (as is the case in the example you have cited); even then, you should still look for some other sort of criterion on which to decide. in this problem in particular, all four of the wrong answers have incorrect parallelism, so you should not need to resort to something like "awkward apostrophe construction" in order to solve this problem.

[lijingli401]

",conforming modifies "is more ergonomic." --->no problem
I remember that Ron says comma+ present participle follow two rules immediate consequence or simultaneous, but lower-priority, action

But" ,conforming" belongs to which one?
I have no idea.

PS: Ron, do you think I should ask this question?, or just remember ", conforming" modify ergonomic. that's all

[RonPurewal]

",conforming modifies "is more ergonomic." --->no problem
I remember that Ron says comma+ present participle follow two rules immediate consequence or simultaneous, but lower-priority, action

But" ,conforming" belongs to which one?
I have no idea.

PS: Ron, do you think I should ask this question?, or just remember ", conforming" modify ergonomic. that's all

in this case, we have an immediate consequence of what "ergonomic" means.

[llzzyy234]

Hi Ron:
I cannot understand "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape " modify "is more ergonomic."
Can you give some examples?

I thought "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape" modify "curves".

My opinion about other options:
For B) and C), I think "conformed to" is not right here.
For D) there is ambiguity, which can be read as:
"conforming more to the body's shape rather than to shape flaunted"
or
"conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted is"
For E) there is also ambiguity, which can be read as:
"conforming more to the shape of the body than to flaunting shape"
or
"conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape is"

Am I right or wrong?

And another question is: if "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape" can modify "curves", why there is no "and" between "more ergonomic, " and "conforming to"

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron:
I cannot understand "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape " modify "is more ergonomic."
Can you give some examples?

I thought "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape" modify "curves".

this is not how COMMA + -ING modifiers are used. when this kind of modifier follows a clause, it modifies the action of the clause.
read here:
post46255.html#p46255

My opinion about other options:
For B) and C), I think "conformed to" is not right here.
For D) there is ambiguity, which can be read as:
"conforming more to the body's shape rather than to shape flaunted"
or
"conforming more to the body's shape rather than shape flaunted is"
For E) there is also ambiguity, which can be read as:
"conforming more to the shape of the body than to flaunting shape"
or
"conforming more to the shape of the body than flaunting shape is"

Am I right or wrong?

there's no need to look at something as subtle as "ambiguity" here, because the non-parallelism in these choices is so blatant.

"ambiguity" is a dangerous thing to think about -- if the meaning of a sentence can be discerned clearly by common sense, then a certain amount of technical ambiguity is often allowed.
parallelism, on the other hand, is a vital issue. if you are looking at these choices and thinking about "ambiguity" before you consider parallelism, that's a very, very bad thing.

And another question is: if "conforming to the shape of the body rather than flaunting shape" can modify "curves", why there is no "and" between "more ergonomic, " and "conforming to"

it doesn't modify "curves". see above.

[mcmebk]

Hi Ron

Perhaps not an issue matters to the option, but I wonder why

"have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is...", so "that" here refer backs to the noun style, wonder how it could jump over "surfaces and curves".

Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron

Perhaps not an issue matters to the option, but I wonder why

"have adopted a cornerless style of smooth surfaces and curves that is...", so "that" here refer backs to the noun style, wonder how it could jump over "surfaces and curves".

Thanks.

It's impossible to place that modifier any closer to the noun. That's the best possible placement.