GMATPREP: Charles Lindbergh, for his attempt...

[gbyhats]

Hi Dear Manhattan Instructors ;)

I have two questions:

1/

(2). "being" starts off a comma + present participle modifier, which, although properly modifies Charles Lindbergh, is not a consequence of the previous clause.[/color]

in general, you shouldn't start a modifier with "being".
check whether you can eliminate "being"!
Being very reluctant to do X, Jim...
--> Very reluctant to do X, Jim...

I'm probably making a mistake here, but: I think we cannot delete "being" in choice (D), right?

--

The sentence structure of choice (D) like this:

[element A] is the reason that [element B]

--> e.g. [heavy rain last night] is the reason that [clothes hanging outside are wet].

Thus, [element A] and [element B] should both be objects or things that happen. However, if "being" in choice (D) is taken away, [element A] becomes a modifier.

--

2/

Well, I have to acknowledge that the phrase "...is the reason that..." itself is wrong, as Ron point out that it makes the clause goes after it modifiers "reason".

hmm, so it leads to another question that JaneC643 had asked: If we change "the reason that" to "the reason why". Is "the reason why" acceptable in GMAT?

[RonPurewal]

if "being" in choice (D) is taken away, [element A] becomes a modifier.

^^ this is accurate.

[RonPurewal]

Is "the reason why" acceptable in GMAT?

it's not strictly wrong, but it's inefficient (= bad) writing.

the correct answers don't contain bad writing, so i can declare fairly confidently that you won't see this in a correct answer.

[RonPurewal]

also, don't forget that the problems are multiple-choice.

your question ("is _____ acceptable?") isn't the right question to ask, because that question represents a task that's much, much, MUCH harder than GMAT SC.
for GMAT SC, you only need to be able to choose between/among alternatives.

in the case of "the reason why", there should always be a better alternative-- and, since that alternative will be present in the other choices, the difference should be plain.

e.g.,
Nobody knows the reason why xxxxx happens (worse)
Nobody knows why xxxxx happens (better)

xxxx happens, but nobody knows the reason why (worse)
xxxx happens, but nobody knows the reason (better)
xxxx happens, but nobody knows why (better)

etc.

[gbyhats]

also, don't forget that the problems are multiple-choice.

your question ("is _____ acceptable?") isn't the right question to ask, because that question represents a task that's much, much, MUCH harder than GMAT SC.
for GMAT SC, you only need to be able to choose between/among alternatives.

in the case of "the reason why", there should always be a better alternative-- and, since that alternative will be present in the other choices, the difference should be plain.

Thank you for your replies! ;)

Haha, yeah, I'm now overkilling Sentence Correction now.

I remember your said sentence correction is, ironically not about correcting sentences, but only a pageant, or beauty contest.

I will keep your words in mind

[RonPurewal]

well, not everything is a "beauty contest".

basically, there are two kinds of issues in sc:
1/ issues that are completely black-and-white. zero/one, on/off, etc.
2/ issues that are not completely black-and-white-- i.e., issues in which there's a continuum from "worse" to "better".

issues of type #1 are NOT "beauty contests".
if an issue is purely binary, then there's no value in trying to make a relative judgment--since the judgment isn't relative! for these things--and ONLY for these things--you actually judge the choices individually.
examples include subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, and complete sentence vs. fragment/run-on.

issues of type #2 (which most likely outnumber those of type #1) ARE "beauty contests". on these issues, you should make relative judgments only.

[RonPurewal]

^^ notice, though, that--regardless of "type #1 vs. type #2" above--you should always FIND issues by comparing the choices.

even in the case of issues that are "type #1" above, you shouldn't just read through the words and try to spot them, cold, as though by magic. (only experienced editors--in fact, only really good experienced editors--can really do that.)

if you do happen to just notice something as you're reading, then, great. but, otherwise, you should never "hunt" for errors; you should just look at what the choices do differently from one another, and focus on the differences.

[gbyhats]

^^ notice, though, that--regardless of "type #1 vs. type #2" above--you should always FIND issues by comparing the choices.

Yes, sir! I will ;)

[RonPurewal]

^^ notice, though, that--regardless of "type #1 vs. type #2" above--you should always FIND issues by comparing the choices.

Yes, sir! I will ;)

excellent.

[rohit.manglik]

Hi Ron,

In A, we have "Complete Sentence - comma - Complete sentence".

If we replace "he therefore" with "therefore he", would therefore act as conjunction to join two ICs? As in the case of comma-FANBOYS. Is comma-FANBOYS rule (to join two ICs) is explicitly for FANBOYS or other conjunctions can also leverage it.

[RonPurewal]

i do not know what "ICs" or "fanboys" is, so i don't understand those parts of the question.

but these things might answer your question:

* 'therefore' is an adverb, and so does not figure into overall structure.
thus, switching 'he' and 'therefore' will have zero effect on sentence structure.

* 'therefore' is an adverb. it is NOT a connector. it can NEVER substitute for 'and'/'but'/'yet'/'because'/'since'/etc.

[BOw541]

i do not know what "ICs" or "fanboys" is, so i don't understand those parts of the question.

PS. Fanboys is the contraction of "for/and/nor/but/or/yet/so" in the Manhattan SC booklet,. Hope this explanation would help you when this kind of 'quote' comes up next time again.

[RonPurewal]

thanks, but 'ICs' is still a mystery.

more importantly, the terminology is nothing but an obstacle. you should be able to frame your questions without 'big words'. if you can, that's the single most reliable indicator that you actually understand the ideas about which you're asking.

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

[charmanineW924]

I looked all the posts here, I cannot understand why D is wrong . Someone said in the previous post that we cannot take away "being" in D,because “being...” is the subject of the sentence "...ws the reason that ...". And I saw the use of "..was the reason that..." is OK, I guess we choose E because D is inferior to E. Am I right ?

[RonPurewal]

it seems you're thinking along these lines:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p118104

if so, that's excellent. this is a PERFECT example of 'When absolute judgments are harder, relative judgments will usually be easier'. nice!