In 1997, despite an economy that marked its sixth full year

[RonPurewal]

One question,
is jump AT always wrong, or it depends on the contexts?
What is the difference between JUMP AT and JUMP TO? Is there a correct idiom?
Thanks.

you can't say "jump at QUANTITY". here, "to" is correct.

on the other hand, if the word "at" is part of some other construction, such as a time marker, then it could appear:
consumer spending always jumps at the end of the year, when the holiday season arrives.
here, "jump at" isn't really a construction; it's just "jump", followed by "at the end of the year".

[rx_11]

Hi Ron,

Could you please elaborate on the usage of the present participle "declaring".
I thought the sentence is talking about a past event - In 1997 .

and suppose choice D at the end has a TO instead of the AT.. which one would be a better choice between B and D then.

Thanks,
Anon

the present participle is fine. it can be used with all tenses of main verbs, to describe actions contemporaneous with the time frame described in the main clause.
the only requirement is that there be at least one tensed verb (i.e., definitively in the past, present, future, etc. tense).

for instance:
shakespeare used his own innovative sonnet form, though most poets writing at the same time used the petrarchan sonnet form.
in this sentence, there are 2 verbs in the simple past tense (both instances of 'used'), so the sentence is anchored in the simple past tense. it's ok to use the present participle 'writing', which signifies only that the writing occurs at the same time as the tensed verbs in the sentence (in this case, in the past). this present participle does NOT signify that the action takes place in the present!
(notice that 'present participle' is somewhat of a misnomer. when you learn the function of different grammatical structures, try not to concentrate on their names, but, rather, on their functions.)

if you want an example of a present participle that doesn't work because it's not anchored by any tensed verb, check out #75 in the yellow o.g. (please don't post details of that problem here.) the choices involving the present participle in that problem are incorrect, inter alia, because there aren't any other past-tense verbs to anchor the sentence.

Hi, Ron,

According to your explanation, could you help me look at this sentense?

-The company had a new machine producing a lot of products.

I asked this sentense to tim before (in this post is-perfect-participle-a-correct-modifier-t11608.html ), but he told me that the usage of the present participle of this sentense is incorrect. I am confused now after seeing your explanation. Could u clarify why it is incorrect?

(This sentense is written by me, have no copyright problem)

[RonPurewal]

According to your explanation, could you help me look at this sentense?

-The company had a new machine producing a lot of products.

it's not wrong, but it's sort of weird -- it gives the sense that the high production was some sort of temporary state, an interpretation that's pretty strange.
see my comments below the line here, if you're interested:
post47770.html#p47770

on the other hand, you can rest assured that you won't have to worry about such considerations of "weirdness" on the actual test -- you should just know that this modifier is legitimate, as long as the action encapsulated by the -ING is in the same tense and timeframe as the action of the clause to which it's attached.

for instance:
3 correct sentences:

Students writing papers 20 years from now will use voice-recognition software.
--> "writing" is a future action, because the main clause is in the future ("will use").

Students writing papers in today’s schools use Microsoft Word.
--> "writing" is a present action, because the main clause is in the present ("use").

Students writing papers 80 years ago used quill pens and India ink.
--> "writing" is a past action, because the main clause ("used") is in the past.

on the other hand, if you have a change of tense/timeframe, then you MUST use a real verb, not an -ing:
People who wrote papers 40 years ago are amazed by today's word-processing tools.
--> in this case, you can't use "people writing...", because "writing" isn't in the same tense/timeframe as "are amazed".

[saintjingjing]

[quote="RonPurewal"]
the present participle is fine. it can be used with all tenses of main verbs, to describe actions contemporaneous with the time frame described in the main clause.
the only requirement is that there be at least one tensed verb (i.e., definitively in the past, present, future, etc. tense).

for instance:
shakespeare used his own innovative sonnet form, though most poets writing at the same time used the petrarchan sonnet form.
in this sentence, there are 2 verbs in the simple past tense (both instances of 'used'), so the sentence is anchored in the simple past tense. it's ok to use the present participle 'writing', which signifies only that the writing occurs at the same time as the tensed verbs in the sentence (in this case, in the past). this present participle does NOT signify that the action takes place in the present!
(notice that 'present participle' is somewhat of a misnomer. when you learn the function of different grammatical structures, try not to concentrate on their names, but, rather, on their functions.)

quote]

hi,ron, I want to ask. can I use such usage that you have said ahead about verbing--to describe actions contemporaneous with the time frame described in the main clause--- to identify that B BETTER THAN C?
and you have written in another post about this SC, I still do not understand about points in terms of verbing and verbed. Could you please explain more?

[RonPurewal]

the present participle is fine. it can be used with all tenses of main verbs, to describe actions contemporaneous with the time frame described in the main clause.
the only requirement is that there be at least one tensed verb (i.e., definitively in the past, present, future, etc. tense).

for instance:
shakespeare used his own innovative sonnet form, though most poets writing at the same time used the petrarchan sonnet form.
in this sentence, there are 2 verbs in the simple past tense (both instances of 'used'), so the sentence is anchored in the simple past tense. it's ok to use the present participle 'writing', which signifies only that the writing occurs at the same time as the tensed verbs in the sentence (in this case, in the past). this present participle does NOT signify that the action takes place in the present!
(notice that 'present participle' is somewhat of a misnomer. when you learn the function of different grammatical structures, try not to concentrate on their names, but, rather, on their functions.)

quote]

hi,ron, I want to ask. can I use such usage that you have said ahead about verbing--to describe actions contemporaneous with the time frame described in the main clause--- to identify that B BETTER THAN C?
and you have written in another post about this SC, I still do not understand about points in terms of verbing and verbed. Could you please explain more?

see what i wrote here
post56468.html#p56468

[Khush]

Looking at the split at the end of the problem, we can narrow the problem to choices B and C (because it doesn't make sense to say that the number of bankrupt citizens jumped 'at' some figure).

The distinction between 'declaring themselves' and 'who declared themselves' is a red herring: both of them are acceptable (although the former is probably a little better, in the sense that it's less wordy).

So it comes down to verb tense: 'has jumped' versus 'jumped'. Take a look at the content of this sentence, though: We're looking IN RETROSPECT at a statistic from the full year 1997, summarizing what happened in that whole year. (We can rest assured that we're not sitting in December 1997, looking back at the year that's just passed us by, because of the talk about 'the sixth full year of uninterrupted expansion.) This means that we have to use the simple past tense ('has jumped' is inappropriate).

So B wins.

well explained!

i hadn't noticed the split, hence chose C.

but, is it usual in GMAT SC that sometimes there is only one error that distinguishes an incorrect choice from the correct one ?
(for ex: i was stuck between B and C. but the verb tense error was the only difference between B and C. i couldn't find any other error to eliminate choice C).

[RonPurewal]

but, is it usual in GMAT SC that sometimes there is only one error that distinguishes an incorrect choice from the correct one ?

If the underlined part is short, sure. (In some problems the underlined part comprises only one or two words, in which case it's impossible to have more than one error.)

If the underline is long, then most often"”but not always"”there will be multiple errors.

[Khush]

i see.

Thanks for the information!

[jnelson0612]

i see.

Thanks for the information!

:-)

Great!

[RonPurewal]

i see.

Thanks for the information!

Sure.

(You should also analyze the data yourself; anything you learn from doing so will "stick" much more thoroughly.)

[750plus]

Dear Team,

I have a doubt with option D and E.
________________________

In 1997, despite an economy that marked its sixth full year of uninterrupted expansion with the lowest jobless rate in a quarter century, the number of United States citizens declaring themselves bankrupt has jumped by almost 20 percent, at 1.34 million.

(A) declaring themselves bankrupt has jumped by almost 20 percent, at
(B) declaring themselves bankrupt jumped by almost 20 percent, to
(C) who declared themselves bankrupt has jumped by almost 20 percent, to
(D) who declared themselves bankrupt jumped almost by 20 percent, at
(E) to declare themselves bankrupt jumped almost by 20 percent, at
_______________________

Is there a missing main verb in D and E? Or is JUMPED the main verb already present in choice D and E. According to me, 'Jumped' is the main verb in both D and E and therefore, D and E are not the case of run on sentences.

D) In 1997, despite an economy that marked its sixth full year of uninterrupted expansion with the lowest jobless rate in a quarter century,
the number of United States citizens [who declared themselves bankrupt] jumped almost by 20 percent, at 1.34 million

Please confirm.

Thanks
Warm Regards

[RonPurewal]

yes, that's a correct analysis... but, why? (who/what gave you the idea that these were "run-on sentences" in the first place?)

[750plus]

Sorry for the late response Mr. Purewal.

One of the members at some other forum tried to confuse me. So, I just wanted to confirm my reasoning.

Thank You so much. It helps.

Warm Regards

[RonPurewal]

hopefully, no one is trying to confuse you. (:

[sri balaji143]

[/quote]

(i) both of those constructions have their place in the english language.
the infinitive construction, though, is usually used in one of the following situations:
a) the action is to take place in the future: my block has five houses to be sold in foreclosure
b) you're talking about some sort of historical accounting: pete rose became the second baseball player in history to amass 4000 career hits
in this case, the '-ing' construction just sounds better to my 'native speaker's ear'. i'm not sure whether you're a native speaker (if you're not, your english is quite good), but it certainly helps for these sorts of borderline cases.

(ii) 'by almost x percent' is the correct form, because the quantity did jump - by an amount that was almost x percent (and you therefore shouldn't break those words up).[/quote]

Ron,

Thank you for the great explanation.

Just a quick doubt- In E, if the option were, 'the number of people to have declared themselves bankrupt' rather than ' the number of people to declare themselves bankrupt' , then would E be correct?

I made a mistake in a question that went like this 'the X people seem to have been equipped to face any challenges put forward in their paths'

I read in one of the forums that 'to + verb' is the present context and 'to have + verbed ' is the past context. Since we are talking about the past in the correct question we should use 'to have + verbed'.

Is my line of thinking correct?

Thanks in advance