In hoping to restrain economic growth, interest rates were r

[pawank491]

Dear Ron
how do u know that

choice d:
- present participle ('restraining') improperly signals ongoing CURRENT action

that's the purpose of using a participial modifier ('restraining...') to open a clause like the one here.

analogy:
hoping to thwart widespread counterfeiting, the country's government recalled all of the existing currency and replaced it with new bills. --> notice that 'hoping' is CURRENT, in terms of the action described in the sentence

Hi Ron,

I have a query here

V-ing , Clause then V-ing takes the time frame (present, past or future)of clause. here how V-ing participle hoping[/b] to thwart widespread counterfeiting is an ongoing action please clarify.

Thanks

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron,
Is preposition + noun/pronoun +Ving in B also problematic?

B. Making it more expensive for businesses and consumers to borrow, interest rates were raised by British policymakers, in hopes of their restraining economic growth.

Thanks,
Have a cheerful day

[RonPurewal]

no, not necessarily—why would that be a problem?

in some sentences, that's how you have to write things (e.g., Milt was still embarrassed, many years later, by the story of his walking into the girls' bathroom on the first day of high school).

[aflaamM589]

Hi Ron,
In this post you said this construction has no prcedence in official problems.
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... 10787.html

Ron:
that kind of modifier -- prep + "them" + __ing -- is a thing that has no precedent in any of the other official problems (and for which i can't seem to create a legitimate example, either).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In another post you had the same point of view,
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... 67-30.html

Aflaam:

In E, preposition noun Ving is an error, right?
e.of plastic being able to be made electrically conductive - an advance that has led

Ron:you are right

what am i missing?
Thanks

[RonPurewal]

neither of those links has anything to do with the construction you're inquiring about (with "their").

[aflaamM589]

Ok, that means
prep + its/their/sandy's/council's/administration's + Ving--> is allowed
but
prep + any object pronoun such as him or them or any subject pronoun such as he/she etc +Ving --> is not allowed

Right?

Furthermore, Preposition + noun + Ving is also incorrect as in following case

e.of plastic being able to be made electrically conductive - an advance that has led

Right?

Thanks
Have a nice day

[RonPurewal]

no, you can't just memorize that. if the INTENDED MEANING is actually "prep + noun", and the modifier is just further description of the noun, then that second construction is perfectly fine.
e.g.,
I took photographs of my cousin playing hockey.
this sentence is totally ok, because i actually took pictures OF MY COUSIN... and then "playing hockey" is just additional description.

on the other hand, a sentence like i've never heard of people biting dogs is wrong, because the intended meaning is NOT "i've never heard of people". the intended meaning is that i've never heard of the idea that people have bitten dogs.

as with almost everything else in SC, you can't just memorize structures -- you have to think about what they are SAYING.