When drafting the Declaration of Sentiments that

[RonPurewal]

i don't know any of the terms in the first paragraph (except "adjective"), so i can't help you there.

fortunately, you've provided examples. (:

your 2 examples are fine, but the word "explain" is unnecessarily specific.

i.e., the "__ing" doesn't always have to be the reason for the subsequent action (though it can be, as in your example #1).
it can also describe another, ongoing action that serves as background for the main action.
e.g.,
Walking down the street with my dog, I ran into an old friend I hadn't seen in years.
--> "walking" doesn't literally explain this encounter--it's just what was going on at the time--but this sentence is still fine.

[RonPurewal]

also, it's not clear whether your understanding of timeframe here is sufficient.

if the "__ing" relates to the main action in the correct way but doesn't occur in the same timeframe, then this kind of sentence is wrong. the main action must occur in the timeframe of "__ing".

this isn't anything special, of course; it's the same principle that obtains for other "__ing" modifiers, too.

e.g.,

Running into the path of an oncoming bus, Tyler was killed instantly.
--> makes sense; tyler was killed while running in front of the bus.

Tyler was struck by a bus, dying instantly.
--> sensible for the same reason.

Running into the path of an oncoming bus, Tyler died in the hospital a few hours later.
Tyler was struck by a bus, dying in the hospital a few hours later.
--> both nonsense, since the actions occur in two different timeframes.

if the timeframes are NOT the same, then, regardless of causality, you can't use a __ing modifier (since this notion of simultaneity is a big part of the reason why __ing modifiers exist in the first place).
rather, you need a different construction altogether, e.g., Tyler ran into the path of an oncoming bus and died in the hospital a few hours later.

[DevD562]

WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH OPTION D???

[RonPurewal]

choice (d) is not a sentence. it's just a noun with a whole bunch of modifiers.

[RonPurewal]

... and, by the way, using ALL CAPS and multiple question marks (???) is the internet equivalent of yelling. please don't; thanks.

[thanghnvn]

[quote="kartik1979"]. When drafting the Declaration of Sentiments that was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Conventions in 1848, included in it by the author, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, was a call for female enfranchisement.

A, When drafting the Declaration of Sentiments that was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Conventions in 1848, included in it by the author, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, was a call for female enfranchisement.
B. Including a call for female enfranchisement, a draft of the Declaration of Sentiments was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Conventions in 1848 that Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote.
C. When the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton was adopted at the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention in 1848, a call for female enfranchisement had been included in it .

regarding choice C

I think that the sequence between "had been" and "was adopted" is correct.

what is the reason for which to think that "had been" go before "drafted".

"drafted" is participle, so, it take tense of "was adopted" , a simple past tense. so, "drafted" is simple past and "had been" go before "drafted" . IS that the reason?

pls, explain more.

[weiw49]

Ron,sorry for trouble again......
I've read trough all the replies of this question, but I can't understand why B is wrong...
you mentioned : the modifier "that Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote" is placed after the name of the convention; this is illogical. she wrote the document, not the convention.

I've took consideration about this point, but it's unnecessary for "that ....." to follow the modified Noun immediately. right?
So I don't think this is a problem,and make the choice of B.

And......um.... someone told me that the subject of the clause is the people --E,not the draft, so B is wrong.
another question is here. How can I judge the subject of choice B (draft or Exxxx) as I haven't found any problem in choice B ?

frustrated me,pls help

[AsadA969]

... and, by the way, using ALL CAPS and multiple question marks (???) is the internet equivalent of yelling. please don't; thanks.

Ron, I try to follow your writing style all the times and I think you follow the standard writing. So, I want to ask a question regarding your last sentence like please don't; thanks.
You've used here (;). But, as far I know, there should've two clauses before and after the (;). So, should we write like that?
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

––– NOTHING IN THIS POST IS RELEVANT TO THE GMAT EXAM –––

commands/orders/requests don’t have subjects.
so, all of these are actually complete sentences:
Leave.
Sit down.
Keep reading.
Don’t touch that glass.
Don’t. (referring to some action that has already been articulated, or else is completely obvious)

if there is a subject, then either…
1/ the speaker is asserting his/her authority forcefully, and perhaps also angrily (You sit down right now!),
or…
2/ there’s a heavy note of sarcasm, irony, and/or humor (You go ahead and try—spoken to someone who will definitely fail if (s)he tries).

—

as for the second part—generally, pleasantries (please, thank you, no problem, hello, goodbye, etc.) were, historically, complete sentences. however, through many centuries of use, they’ve contracted.
e.g.,
Thank you was originally I thank you.
Please… comes from …, if you please, which, in turn, comes from …if it would please you (to do so).
Goodbye was originally May God be with you.

obviously, in direct speech, it is perfectly OK to speak pleasantries in isolation, as though they were complete sentences.

—

again, NOTHING IN THIS POST IS RELEVANT TO THE GMAT EXAM, because neither pleasantries nor second-person sentences appear on the test.

[AsadA969]

Thank you so much Ron.

[tim]

I love how you used the single-word sentence "Thanks." in the same post where you called Ron into question for using it.

[AsadA969]

Tim,
I am not RON; I just "I Myself", and can't be Ron for a single day in my life if I also get 800 perfect score in GMAT. Ron used "thanks" after semi-colon, not as a single word like me. I try to scrutinize Ron's writing word by word. So, I thought there is something wrong in Ron's writing but I forgot that Ron can't be wrong (most probably).
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

most importantly, you should be very, very circumspect about trying to equate dialogue with formal written language. these are two very, very different things.

[tim]

And keep in mind that sometimes we instructors slip into more informal language on our posts, so just because we write something a particular way in responding to a post doesn't mean it's acceptable GMAT grammar. I've tried to make my posts conform more to what the GMAT would consider acceptable, but some of my posts from a few years ago were terrible examples of GMAT grammar (not to mention punctuation and capitalization!).

[AsadA969]

most importantly, you should be very, very circumspect about trying to equate dialogue with formal written language. these are two very, very different things.

Yep, I'll try with my level best to follow your suggestion in all the cases because I think you are my IDEAL.
Thanks for your suggestion.