Such orb-weaving spiders like the argiope

[Haibara]

the whole point of "such X's as..." is to convey that you're NOT talking about all X's.
E.g., if you mention the language used in such books as the Bible, then your point is that Biblical language is NOT used in all books.

E.g.,Fashion designers, such as Claudio, create clothes for stylish gentlemen.
* Claudio is a designer.
* Designers make clothes for stylish guys.
* This sentence does not imply that Claudio does this in the same way other designers do it. He may create innovations that the fashion world has never seen before.

Ron, according to what you said in the first quote, then why can't the sentence in the second quote means ----Claudio create clothes for stylish gentlemen, but not all fashion designers create clothes for stylish gentlemen?

Similary, in the below sentence：

Positive feelings for others such as liking or loving is called an interpersonal attraction or close relationship.

The sentence just means liking and loving is called an interpersonal attraction or close relationship, but not all positive feelings are called so.

Please give a comment.
Ron, thanks so much.

[RonPurewal]

Yeah, there should have been commas there. Now they're there. Thanks.

The last sentence does convey the intended meaning, although you've got a plural subject with "is".
|:

[RonPurewal]

By the way"”Most of the questions you're asking on this forum are about small nuances.
Since that's the case, you should probably go take the exam now (or, at least, very soon).

The problem is this: If you study for too long, then your attention may be diverted from major themes to little trifles and nuances"”and so you may actually get a lower score than you'd have gotten earlier (when you were still focused on major topics).

Case in point: In writing your last example above, you were so concerned with the presence/absence of commas (a nuance that the GMAT doesn't even test) that you wrote "feelings ... is".
Uh-oh.

[eggpain24]

well，Ron

offer some of my analysis about this problem, please clarify

as per my own observation

comma+with is a rather “versatile” modifier，which could either modify the “preceding clause（adverbial modifier） or the ”preceding noun“ （noun modifier）

So，in choice A，B

I just didn't rule out these two based on “with” structure （because it can serve as “noun modifier”，which really makes sense）

they are wrong for more obvious S-V agreement errors

in choice D

at first glance → I think “webs that are essentially wheel-like” is much wordier than “wheel-like webs”

but that is the only “grammatically correct” choice I left

therefore → I start consider “with” as adverbial modifier（which makes the appearance of “that is” really necessary → for it introduce a “clause”）

this is a perfect answer under the disguise of “wordiness” （which meant to be a trap！）

[kedieez967]

hi, ron, sorry for bumping.

1# "with an outer rim and..." must refer to the noun "webs" or a clause that describes the "webs", rather than "wheel-like structure", because it makes more sense to say webs "with an outer rim and....".
could i kill choices based on above understandings?

2# such orb weaving spiders as the argiope build wheel-like webs, with an outer rim and a number of spokes emanating from the hub.
is this sentence right? and does it convey the intended meaning of the author?

3# in above sentence, the comma before "with" is necessary, since the sentence without "comma" may lose some clarity.
is my idea right?

4# is there any difference between following sentence?
i use Manhattan Prep books such as Manhattan Prep Sentence Correction to guide my GMAT study.
i use such Manhattan Prep books as Manhattan Prep Sentence Correction to guide my GMAT study.
i already read the link: http://www.beatthegmat.com/according-vs ... tml#359093
but i still confuse about it.

wait for your clarification.

Thank you very much!
Best wishes!

[RonPurewal]

--- ALL OF THESE DISTINCTIONS ARE TOO SUBTLE TO BE NECESSARY ON THIS EXAM ---

1/
as far as the gmat is concerned, there's no difference. the web has a rim and spokes; the structure has a rim and spokes; both are reasonable.

2/
comma + 'with ___' normally describe the previous action / previous verb (or, equivalently, the previous subject+verb).
this is why the correct answer is structured as it is. in the correct answer, comma + 'with ___' describes '...that are wheel-like'.

if you want to describe just the noun, then, no comma.

3/
YOUR sentence (from #2) SHOULD have a comma.

--- ALL OF THESE DISTINCTIONS ARE TOO SUBTLE TO BE NECESSARY ON THIS EXAM ---

[RonPurewal]

just in case i'm not being emphatic enough—the most important thing in the above post is 'ALL OF THESE DISTINCTIONS ARE TOO SUBTLE TO BE NECESSARY ON THIS EXAM'.

if you start thinking in such subtle terms...
...STOP
...see whether you can find something more straightforward, fundamental, and/or black-and-white.

if subtle differences are present, they are essentially always there to distract you from more fundamental things.

[kedieez967]

Thank you very much for your reply.

i know the difference is to SUBTLE to BE NECESSARY. but i occasionally came cross the problem and am just curious about it.

Really thank you.

PS. i watched your RC videos on how to Approach highly technical passages. They are really good and help me get the main idea of passages more easily.

[RonPurewal]

Thank you very much for your reply.

i know the difference is to SUBTLE to BE NECESSARY. but i occasionally came cross the problem and am just curious about it.

...right, but there's a very very VERY thin line between 'curious' and 'easily distracted'.
if you let these kinds of things dilute your focus on the fundamentals, your performance WILL suffer.

this problem is especially acute in people who have been studying for too long already.

[RonPurewal]

Really thank you.

you're welcome.

[thanghnvn]

I am confused too,
in the pattern
main clause, with+noun+noun modifier

then the "with" phrase mofidies the preceding clause.

in this problem we have

main clause, with+noun

we do not have noun modifier for "rim", so this "with" phrase should modify a preceding noun,

pls, help
thank you

[AnupamaW260]

Hello Sir

Could you please confirm -- in option B > Such orb-weaving spiders as the argiope BUILDS webs with.......
is subect-verb fine?

According to earlier post, Such Xs' as Y ---> we are talking about Y
Xs' , such as y, ....... ->we are talking about X

So could you please confirm Such orb-weaving spiders as the argiope BUILDS is fine?

Thank you

[RonPurewal]

not fine, since the subject is 'spiders' (plural).

'such ... as the xxxx' is just a modifier.

[AnupamaW260]

not fine, since the subject is 'spiders' (plural).

'such ... as the xxxx' is just a modifier.

Sorry I don't understand ~

You have written as below
the whole point of "such X's as..." is to convey that you're NOT talking about all X's.
E.g., if you mention the language used in such books as the Bible, then your point is that Biblical language is NOT used in all books.

What am I missing?
Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

that is how the meaning is changed, but the meaning is not at issue here.
the issue here is 'what's the subject?', which is a purely mechanical question.

mechanically, this is just spiders + modifiers.
'such ... as xxxx' is a modifier. like any other modifier, it leaves the rest of the grammar unchanged.