thirteen colonies

[thanghnvn]

why in choice A, is there no "and" before "others" ?

Pls, explain to me

thank you

[DiJ92]

Dear Ron

there are two sentences in my mind:

1: Our teacher said that we each would need a student card, a pen, and a eraser in the final exam.
2: Our teacher said that a student card, a pen, and a eraser would be needed by each of us in the final exam.


Which sentence is better? Some people said that the active " would need" is better than the passive " would be needed". I do not think so. I think the first one is better even though the latter one is also ok. Am I right?

[RonPurewal]

the first sentence is better than the second one.

here, the focus is obviously on the students.
in other words, the main point of the sentence is NOT "this equipment will be needed". rather, the main point is "the students will need these things".

thus the sentence makes more sense with the students as the subject.

if this is not clear, consider:
...in a conversation, someone might ask, "What will the students need?" ...and then this would be the answer.
...on the other hand, NO ONE would EVER ask, "When or by whom will these particular items be needed?"
i think you get the point.

[RonPurewal]

these examples should help to clarify:

Dale cannot drive his car at work, because he uses the truck to deliver freight.
--> this sentence is primarily about what dale can('t) do.
--> this sentence is NOT primarily about whether the truck is in use.

Between noon and 8pm the truck is used to deliver freight, so you will not be able to use it for other tasks during that time.
--> this sentence is primarily about when the truck is in use.
--> this sentence has NOTHING to do with WHO is using the truck for deliveries.

--

obviously, this will never be the ONLY problem with a sentence. before you think about anything like this, ALWAYS check to see whether you can find something easier / more fundamental / more black-and-white.

[ysyanshi]

Hi Ron, would you please explain why C is wrong? Isn't "some that formed..." a noun modifier, so that the construction of "NOUNs, each VERB..." still work?

[RonPurewal]

you're making the worst possible SC mistake: you're considering small/subtle things BEFORE big, fundamental, black-and-white things.

"its"?
yep, there's the problem with C.

[ysyanshi]

you're making the worst possible SC mistake: you're considering small/subtle things BEFORE big, fundamental, black-and-white things.

"its"?
yep, there's the problem with C.

You are correct, Ron! I do have this problem!! Actually I feel suffered when I am doing sentence correction questions...very suffered...

[RonPurewal]

that's a problem that tends to get worse and worse, IF people STUDY FOR TOO LONG for this exam.

if someone is already sufficiently prepared in terms of fundamentals, but continues to do studying that's essentially superfluous, then, eventually, his/her brain will simply become bored with the fundamentals.
at that point, (s)he will tend to become more and more distracted by the little distractions they throw into the problems, and less and less focused on the big, black-and-white, fundamental things. you see where that road heads.

remember—this exam is specifically designed NOT to require extensive studying. yep. that's actually the point of the exam (among other things).

[VikasY268]

The thirteen original British colonies in North America, some formed as commercial ventures, others as religious havens, each had a written charter that set forth its form of government and the rights of the colonists.

Isn't that refers to charter and since charter is singular shouldn't set should sets.

[RonPurewal]

it's past tense.

[RAHULS852]

Ron, pls, help. I do not understand above explanation. Pls, explain carefully and with an example. Thank you a lot.

explain "carefully"? hmm?
i don't think that means what you think it means.

--

here's an example:
ron has a very full schedule this week, with every one of his available time slots occupied.
--> this sentence works, because "with" actually applies to ron and/or his schedule -- i.e., ron is the person with those occupied time slots, and/or his schedule is actually the thing with those time slots.
in (e), "some" is referring to the colonies themselves, so that sentence is literally talking about "colonies with colonies". that doesn't make sense.

--

[edited] -- the explanation i originally wrote here was in error.

Hi Sage/ Manhattan expert,

I got confused with the usage of ",with".

Ron's post said that "with some" means "colonies with colonies". I thought that there are 13 colonies & "with some" express few colonies( 5/6 colonies).
Eg: (1) Tarun received 100$ cashback from Amazon,with 50 $ as a recharge voucher.
Here 50$ is part of 100$ cashback.
(2) James was injured badly in the accident, with three bones broken badly enough to require surgery.
here 3 bones are part of James.
(3) Indian food comprises many different styles of cooking, with each a product of their regional influences, from the fiery vegetarian dishes of the south to the Portuguese-influenced Goan cooking of the west, to the more familiar Mogul food of the north.

This (3) example is wrong because ",with each" describes all style of cooking bit it should describe sub component of style.

I got confused in similar OG problem OG 19 Q 777.( Changed words )

Before 2000, mobile companies in New York were free to charge whatever tariffs the market would bear,with no approval required from regulators before the raising of rates.
I understand the error of "the raising vs raising" but could not properly understand ",with".

Sorry to bother you with long post and many questions . Kindly help to resolve this confusion.

Regards,
Rahul Singh

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

I'm not sure that I can give you clear rules for modifiers starting with 'with' - looking over the OG, there are lots of different examples, I guess because the word 'with' has so many different meanings. However, it seems that the OG doesn't favor modifiers starting with 'with'. Good examples, but I would say that there are some issues:
(1) Tarun received 100$ cashback from Amazon,with 50 $ as a recharge voucher.
In my opinion, this is unclear as it could be interpreted as part of the $100 or as an extra $50. I think this sentence would be preferable:
(1a) Tarun received 100$ cashback from Amazon, 50$ of which was a recharge voucher.

(2) James was injured badly in the accident, with three bones broken badly enough to require surgery.
This seems fine to me - there's no confusion about the meaning.

With (3) I'm pretty confident that GMAT would phrase it this way:
(3a) Indian food comprises many different styles of cooking, each a product of their regional influences, from the fiery vegetarian dishes of the south to the Portuguese-influenced Goan cooking of the west, to the more familiar Mogul food of the north.

I took a look at SC777 from OG2019 and it's a good example. Although GMAT isn't testing you directly between a CLAUSE, -ing modifier and a comma with modifier, we can see that they prefer the former. I would say that the comma with modifier isn't wrong, but is less preferable than the CLAUSE, -ing modifier in this case.

[RAHULS852]

I'm not sure that I can give you clear rules for modifiers starting with 'with' - looking over the OG, there are lots of different examples, I guess because the word 'with' has so many different meanings. However, it seems that the OG doesn't favor modifiers starting with 'with
Actually i did not get this highlighted portion. B/w" ,-ing modifier"and ",with modifier" I have to prefer ",ing modifier".

I got the point about ",with some" after your modification of 3rd example.

(A) The thirteen original British colonies........ ,some(colonies) formed as commercial ventures, others as religious havens
Meaning is clear that out of 13 some formed as commercial ventures and others as religious havens
(E) The thirteen original British colonies....... with some( colonies) formed as commercial ventures, while others as religious havens
here meaning is absurd. 13 colonies with some (colonies) means "colonies with colonies".

Thanks
Regards,
Rahul Singh

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

B/w" ,-ing modifier"and ",with modifier" I have to prefer ",ing modifier".

With extreme caution, I'd agree with that sentence. Actually, unless there is some really clear meaning to check, I'd avoid those splits and find other things to deal with in SC problems.

I agree with your analysis, however the issue with E is not that the meaning is "absurd", but that the meaning isn't clear.

[RAHULS852]

Ok got your point.

Thanks for suggestion.

Regards,
Rahul Singh