Subjunctive verb

[amit1234]

that's the problem - you've found the wrong thing to modify. first, if you read the thread you will realize that is wrong because the comma-ing construction creates an adverbial modifier, i.e. one that does not modify nouns. what it actually modifies in the example you cite is "act", which is a verb..

Hi Ron /Tim
I am not clear on this one.
"comma + ing" modifier should only be used when:

it MODIFIES THE ENTIRE ACTION of the preceding clause, and it APPLIES TO THE SUBJECT of that clause;

In the following example:

In a plan to stop the erosion of East Coast beaches,the Army Corps of Engineers proposed building parallel to shore a breakwater of rocks that would rise six feet above the waterline and act as a buffer,absorbing the energy of crashing waves and protecting the beaches.


how does ' absorbingthe energy of crashing waves and protecting the beaches.' applies to subject ' the Army Corps of Engineers'

can you please elaborate so that it will be easy for me to understand.

[tim]

the best way to deal with adverbial modifiers is to ignore anything you've read about them referring to an entire clause, and instead look for a single word to attach it to. usually this will be a verb. in this case, "absorbing" modifies "act"..

[thanghnvn]

My understanding based on the SC guide that "suggest" is a subjunctive and should be followed by that and clause, verb in the clause should be base form.

I came across following question in one of the MGMAT CAT's, in which correct choice does not follow that pattern, can somebody explain why that is

Some scientists suggest the moon had been formed out of part of the Earth, which was dislodged perhaps by a meteor.
A)the moon had been formed out of part of the Earth, which was dislodged perhaps
B)that the moon was formed from part of the Earth that had perhaps been dislodged
C)that part of the Earth formed the moon, which was dislodged perhaps
D)the moon was formed out of part of the Earth, having perhaps been dislodged
E)that the moon had been formed from part of the Earth, which perhaps had been dislodged

Thanks

I want to discuss another problem in this question.

some times "which" relative clause can modify slightly far noun (many questions in og show this point) but some times this case is not acceptable (question 49 in og13 shows this points). my conclusion is that the structure in which "which" relative clause modifies a slightly far noun is considered inferior and is not absolute error. Pronoun ambuguity is also considered not absolute error; this mean if there is no better choices, the structure is not considered error.

not absolute error troubles us because we see them in correct answers in some questions but we consider it an error in other question.

is my thinking correct, pls help comment/explain this point.

[tim]

please do not post the same question in multiple threads..

[Daisyc463]

Hi Ron / Tim,

The Manhattan's CAT official explanation states that in choice A, "which" illogically represents "the Earth" and in choice B "that" correctly represents "the parts" instead of "earth". Could you please help me clarify the difference here? Why "A" is confusing and "B" is not. Also, in the Manhattan's GMAT sentence correction guide, you have an example there says "The box of nails, which is nearly full, belongs to Jean." In this sentence, you explained that "which" refers to box not nails. What is the difference here compare to choice A?

Thanks!