"such as" in "Bethlehem Steel"

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[ShriramC110]

Hi Ron,

After reading the posts above, still i am not getting why is that essential in option B and why is option A wrong.
Can you please explain why is that necessary in option B??

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

After reading the posts above, still i am not getting why is that essential in option B and why is option A wrong.
Can you please explain why is that necessary in option B??

B is a sentence. A is not a sentence.

B:
Filipino groceries are now harder to find in my neighborhood, as the only store that sold them has gone out of business.
this is a proper sentence.
because it has fewer words, it is presumably easier to understand.
if you don't understand how it works, then ask (SPECIFICALLY) about whatever you don't understand.

A:
Filipino groceries are now harder to find in my neighborhood, as the only store sold them has gone out of business.
this is not a sentence.
you can't 'do something do something else'.

[mikalaisin]

Hi Ron,
maybe you can help to clear our my understanding about connecting two independent clauses. My perception that two ICs can be connected only by either semicolon or FANBOYS (For, and, nor, but, or, yet, so)

We have :
The steel industry has changed radically over the last two decades, - ICs 1
as large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel have greatly downsized, or in some cases shut down altogether - 2nd ICs and they should be joined by semicolon.

Thus we have two ICs, meaning that we need to have " and" or any other "fanboys" or we should use semicolon, but in this example it is not the case.

Can you please help me to grasp the understanding when should we use semicolon and colon to connect ICs based on this example?

[RonPurewal]

i don't know the terminology.

as far as i can tell, 'IC' just means 'complete sentence', so i'm going to assume that 'IC' means 'complete sentence'.

My perception that two ICs can be connected only by either semicolon or FANBOYS (For, and, nor, but, or, yet, so

if 'IC' just means 'complete sentence', then this is very clearly false; there are tons and tons of words that can connect two complete sentence.

I was late to work because there was unusually heavy traffic.

Everyone will receive a refund, since the show was cancelled.

Joanne did not qualify for the Olympic team, even though she beat her own personal record in the qualifying race.

etc.

--

[RonPurewal]

...and, if 'IC' means something more specific than just 'complete sentence', then that distinction—whatever it might be—does nothing except make things needlessly complicated.
if this is the case, then it's just one of innumerably many examples of how terminology interferes with learning, rather than facilitating it.

if you have to use big words, you don't understand what you're talking about.
--Douglas Osheroff, 1996 Nobel laureate in physics

examples are on your team. terminology is on the other team.
--Ron Purewal

[AmitS467]

Hi Ron,
With THAT in option B, isn't another modifier embedded into the sentence? I believe THAT here refers to Bethlehem Steel and hence the verb must be singular- HAS not have. Please clarify.

Thanks

2/
Yes, "companies" (plural) <--> "have downsized" (plural).

thanks,Ron.
Moreover,
how about the following statement that i have answered,is it right?
i.e. large companies such as B steel has downsized. In this sentence ,the "such as" without comma ,the subject is B steel
large companies ,such as B steel, have downsized.In this sentence ,the "such as" with comma ,the subject is companies,

No, yes.

In both of these examples, "such as xxxx" is a modifier, and so can be ignored in considering the core sentence structure.

"Such as xxxx" is ALWAYS a modifier. It can NEVER be the subject of a verb that follows it, unless there's another modifier embedded into it (e.g., "such as xxxx that ____" or "such as xxxx, which ____").

[RonPurewal]

"that once conducted operations from mining at one end of the process to shipping at the other" is a modifier.

if you lift this modifier out, the remaining sentence is
large, integrated companies (such as BS) ... have greatly downsized

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron,
is as in B conveying the meaning of reasoning (causation) i.e in same sense as because is used?
i have an idea that as, when followed by verb, can convey the meaning of causation, simultaneity/duration, or comparison.
Is it simultaneity or causation?
Kind of confused as verb in both parts has remained same.

:The steel industry has changed radically over the last two decades, as large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel once conducted operations from mining at one end of the process to shipping at the other have greatly downsized, or in some cases shut down altogether.
A as large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel
B as large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
C with large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
D while large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
E and large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel

Thank you very much.

[RonPurewal]

you can figure out questions like this, by just thinking about the context.

in this sentence, there's definitely "simultaneity".

common sense says there's probably causation in both directions (the changes in the industry overall caused the companies to transform themselves, AND those transformations brought further changes to the industry).
in that sort of situation, "as" is a perfectly appropriate connector to use.

[aflaamM589]

Thank you very much for your reply.

Is it true GMAT avoids using as for causation?

Have you ever encountered an official question in which as is used for conveying the meaning of causation?

Thanks in anticipation

[RonPurewal]

there's no way i could possibly remember that (or look it up). you'll just have to look out for such a thing.

[SambitP981]

it's good that you are thinking about meaning.
ironically, though, choice C is wrong for purely mechanical reasons (= issues that have nothing to do with meaning).

the problem here is overall structure: the correct answer is a sentence, but choice C is not a sentence.

if we strip off the modifiers, leaving the "skeleton" (= core structure) of each choice, here's what we get:

B/
The industry has changed, as companies have downsized or shut down.
--> this is a sentence.

C/
The industry has changed, with companies have downsized or shut down.
--> this is not a sentence ("with" can't be followed by a complete sentence).

Hi Ron,

Please have a look into the below sentence:

Ron has a very full schedule this week, with everyone of his available time slot occupied.

This example was given by you when you were trying to explain a SC question in this forum.

I am confused here. Isnt "Ron has a very full schedule this week" a complete sentence? How is the context different from the one that you explained above? Also when can "with" be used as a Adverbial modifier? I know i am mixing all uses of "with" up. But i cant really understand when and where to use "with"? Appreciate your help.

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

"with" can't be FOLLOWED by a complete sentence.

[SambitP981]

"with" can't be FOLLOWED by a complete sentence.

Hi Ron,

"Ron has a very full schedule this week" is a complete sentence in the example "Ron has a very full schedule this week, with everyone of his available time slot occupied." Still why here with is followed?

Thanks