The computer company has announced that it will purchase the

[smilepinks]

Ron, could you explain why B,C is wrong? Why can't we think them as "final clause"?

when you have noun modifiers like these - called appositives, if you happen to care about terminology - they must tag the immediately preceding noun (in the same manner as would a modifier with a comma followed by "which", for example).
see here.

according to this rule, then, choices (b) and (c) both declare that the actual amount of $950 million is "(a) part of a deal..."
that's incorrect; it's the purchase / acquisition of the rival company's color printing division that's part of the deal. therefore, this is a misplaced modifier.

Hi Ron, Please reply to my post above

Thanks

[agendra1003]

Ron, could you explain why B,C is wrong? Why can't we think them as "final clause"?

when you have noun modifiers like these - called appositives, if you happen to care about terminology - they must tag the immediately preceding noun (in the same manner as would a modifier with a comma followed by "which", for example).
see here.

according to this rule, then, choices (b) and (c) both declare that the actual amount of $950 million is "(a) part of a deal..."
that's incorrect; it's the purchase / acquisition of the rival company's color printing division that's part of the deal. therefore, this is a misplaced modifier.

Hi Ron, Please reply to my post above

Thanks

Hi,

I also have the same doubt....any MGMAT instructor plz explain

[ayushrastogi82]

bump

[lcy19812000]

is any moderate can help us at this point, please?

[vishalsahdev03]

Looking at the sentence, I see that the verb "make" is used for "part of deal" which is singular, hence we need "makes". ---

Please Clarify where I am going wrong !

Also, in D and E 'as' is used which means that "$950 million" were "as" (acted as) a part of deal and not actually a part of deal, please point the error in my line of thought here ! I thought D and E are completely out !! and marked B as the answer!

After reading the explanations on ' appositive ' I understand the it modifies '950 million' But I thought that this amount is actually the part of the deal.

Please provide the explanation and point out the errors in my approach, it will really help me !

Best Regards,
Thanks in advance !!

[tankobe]

bump! We need Ron!.............

Ron, could you explain why B,C is wrong? Why can't we think them as "final clause"?

when you have noun modifiers like these - called appositives, if you happen to care about terminology - they must tag the immediately preceding noun (in the same manner as would a modifier with a comma followed by "which", for example).
see here.

according to this rule, then, choices (b) and (c) both declare that the actual amount of $950 million is "(a) part of a deal..."
that's incorrect; it's the purchase / acquisition of the rival company's color printing division that's part of the deal. therefore, this is a misplaced modifier.

Ron, I am really fan of your explanations. You are awesome!!
I have 3 small doubts here-

1) B) million, a part of a deal that makes

Is n't this an absolute phrase (Noun + Noun Modifier), which could be used to describe an idea mentioned elsewhere in the sentence before comma.

for example:
Scientist have found high levels of iridium in certain geographical formations arouond the world, results that suggest the cataclysmic impact of a meteor millions of year ago.

If Yes, then part can modify purchase / acquisition

2) C) million, part of a deal making

What is the usage of Present partciple without a comma
(I understand that ", Present participle" would modify the previous action/clause)
For example, In choice C, Is making directly modifying deal?

3) Which of the following is correct between

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused plant and animal extinctions marking the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.

AND

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused the plant and animal extinctions that mark the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.


Thanks in advance

[tankobe]

bump!!
could anyone reply to this question?

Ron, could you explain why B,C is wrong? Why can't we think them as "final clause"?

when you have noun modifiers like these - called appositives, if you happen to care about terminology - they must tag the immediately preceding noun (in the same manner as would a modifier with a comma followed by "which", for example).
see here.

according to this rule, then, choices (b) and (c) both declare that the actual amount of $950 million is "(a) part of a deal..."
that's incorrect; it's the purchase / acquisition of the rival company's color printing division that's part of the deal. therefore, this is a misplaced modifier.

Ron, I am really fan of your explanations. You are awesome!!
I have 3 small doubts here-

1) B) million, a part of a deal that makes

Is n't this an absolute phrase (Noun + Noun Modifier), which could be used to describe an idea mentioned elsewhere in the sentence before comma.

for example:
Scientist have found high levels of iridium in certain geographical formations arouond the world, results that suggest the cataclysmic impact of a meteor millions of year ago.

If Yes, then part can modify purchase / acquisition

2) C) million, part of a deal making

What is the usage of Present partciple without a comma
(I understand that ", Present participle" would modify the previous action/clause)
For example, In choice C, Is making directly modifying deal?

3) Which of the following is correct between

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused plant and animal extinctions marking the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.

AND

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused the plant and animal extinctions that mark the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.


Thanks in advance

[tankobe]

B) million, a part of a deal that makes
C) million, part of a deal making
E) million as part of a deal that will make

having thought this question two weeks, i have some opinion about option B and C.
Although Ron said deal in B and C do not have a atandence in the former clause, it may be not the turth.
as OG material some guys posted:
1#Scientist have found high levels of iridium in certain geographical formations arouond the world, results that suggest the cataclysmic impact of a meteor millions of year ago. -- results here is OK; results refer to finding.
2#Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area.

So choice B and C is grammatically OK regardless "that" relative clause. But there is still another question：in B and C，dear must refer to perchasing, thereby saying that perchasing is the dear rather than part of "dear", so distortint the original meaning.

however, in the construct: sb do sth as part of deal; deal is a deal--it do not refer to anything. so perchasing can be part of a dear.
there is another example in gamt reading material:
They had begun to press for change in census-taking methods as part of the participation in the antislavery movement.

if i am wrong, please correct me!

[tankobe]

just bump!

B) million, a part of a deal that makes
C) million, part of a deal making
E) million as part of a deal that will make

having thought this question two weeks, i have some opinion about option B and C.
Although Ron said deal in B and C do not have a atandence in the former clause, it may be not the turth.
as OG material some guys posted:
1#Scientist have found high levels of iridium in certain geographical formations arouond the world, results that suggest the cataclysmic impact of a meteor millions of year ago. -- results here is OK; results refer to finding.
2#Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area.

So choice B and C is grammatically OK regardless "that" relative clause. But there is still another question：in B and C，dear must refer to perchasing, thereby saying that perchasing is the dear rather than part of "dear", so distortint the original meaning.

however, in the construct: sb do sth as part of deal; deal is a deal--it do not refer to anything. so perchasing can be part of a dear.
there is another example in gamt reading material:
They had begun to press for change in census-taking methods as part of the participation in the antislavery movement.

if i am wrong, please correct me!

[RonPurewal]

Hi ron your xplaination is GREAT

pls clarify this poimt it will be pleasure:

A. He passed the examination with GPA 3.5, making his parents happy.
B.He passed the examination with GPA 3.5, an event that highly delights his parents.
C. He passed the examination with GPA 3.5,an event exremley delightful for his parents.
D. He always shows respect to the old people, a behaviour respected by all.

from your above appositive explanation all B, C, D is wrong and only A is correct.

pls clarify.

nope. all four of those are correct.

since "an event" is an ABSTRACTION, it is allowed to stand for the entire idea of the preceding post.

see here:
post35386.html#p35386

[RonPurewal]

1) B) million, a part of a deal that makes

Is n't this an absolute phrase (Noun + Noun Modifier), which could be used to describe an idea mentioned elsewhere in the sentence before comma.

for example:
Scientist have found high levels of iridium in certain geographical formations arouond the world, results that suggest the cataclysmic impact of a meteor millions of year ago.

If Yes, then part can modify purchase / acquisition

the difference is that "results" is an ABSTRACTION. abstract nouns are allowed to stand for the whole idea of the preceding clause, rather than just the preceding noun or noun phrase.
see here:
post35386.html#p35386

"a part of a deal" is CONCRETE, so it stands for the preceding noun.

the distinction is subtle, but important.

for another example of comma + concrete noun (again, standing only for the preceding noun) in a correct answer, see here:
yellow-jackets-number-among-the-900-or-so-species-of-the-t3105.html

2) C) million, part of a deal making

What is the usage of Present partciple without a comma
(I understand that ", Present participle" would modify the previous action/clause)
For example, In choice C, Is making directly modifying deal?

if there's NO COMMA, then -ING marks the preceding noun (in much the same way as would a clause with "that" or "which").

3) Which of the following is correct between

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused plant and animal extinctions marking the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.

AND

An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused the plant and animal extinctions that mark the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.


Thanks in advance

they're both fine. the repetition of "that" in the second one is sort of ugly, though.

there's a slight difference in meaning.
* in the first one, "marking" is simultaneous with "caused", since that's how -ing modifiers work: they adopt the tense of the clause to which they're attached (see here: post35042.html#p35042). therefore, the first one indicates that these events marked the end of the era at the time when they occurred.
* in the second one, "that mark" is in the present tense, indicating that this timeline is valid from the point of view of today's observers.

both of the above meanings make sense, so both versions are technically fine.

[RonPurewal]

people -

bump

is any moderate can help us at this point, please?

Please reply to my post

we answer the threads in chronological order - OLDEST FIRST.

if you "bump" a thread like this, then you're actually making it into the newest thread in the folder. therefore. every time you post "bump" or "please reply", you are moving your post back into the LAST spot in the queue.

[tankobe]

3) Which of the following is correct between

1# An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused plant and animal extinctions marking the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.

AND

2# An asteroid bigger than Mount Everest slammed into North America, Sixty-five million years ago, an event that caused the plant and animal extinctions that mark the end of the geologic era known as the Cretaceous Period.


Thanks in advance

they're both fine. the repetition of "that" in the second one is sort of ugly, though.

there's a slight difference in meaning.
* in the first one, "marking" is simultaneous with "caused", since that's how -ing modifiers work: they adopt the tense of the clause to which they're attached (see here: post35042.html#p35042). therefore, the first one indicates that these events marked the end of the era at the time when they occurred.
* in the second one, "that mark" is in the present tense, indicating that this timeline is valid from the point of view of today's observers.

both of the above meanings make sense, so both versions are technically fine.

Ron, you miss something. in 2#, mark is in a singular Verb form, suggesting the subject of the VERB mark should be event rather than plant and animal extinctions----according to the context, dose not make any sense.

[purduesr]

"a part of a deal" is CONCRETE, so it stands for the preceding noun.

Can someone tell me how a part of a deal can be a concrete noun? "part" is noun and "of a deal" is a preposition phrase so "a part of a deal" is noun phrase?? I'm confused because part itself should be abstract. can someone clarify?

[RonPurewal]

Ron, you miss something. in 2#, mark is in a singular Verb form, suggesting the subject of the VERB mark should be event rather than plant and animal extinctions----according to the context, dose not make any sense.

whoa, no. "mark", like ALL regular verbs in english, is singular when it ends with an 's' and plural when it does not.

to let that sink in, just consider very simple examples, such as "the dog runs" and "the dogs run".