The organic food industry

[jingjiaol257]

Hi Ron..

I have a query..
We have generally seen "and also" is wrong in most questions as it is redundant. I have only seen it in the right answer choice of one question.

there's nothing redundant about "and also".

"and also" is redundant if it appears in the same sentence as "both"; this may be what you're thinking about.

i.e.,
X and also Y --> totally fine
both X and also Y --> redundant (and therefore incorrect)

hi,ron
Do you think that "and also" in choice A is right. I see something you said about the usage of "and also" .


"X and Y" is normally used to indicate two different things. (if you said "the first woman and the first Swedish writer", without the "also", that would normally imply 2 different people)

"X and also Y" is normally used to bestow two descriptions on the SAME person or thing (notice that both of these descriptions are meant to describe Selma Lagerlof).

After reading these words,I think "and also" is incorrect in choice A.Am I wrong?
thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron..

I have a query..
We have generally seen "and also" is wrong in most questions as it is redundant. I have only seen it in the right answer choice of one question.

there's nothing redundant about "and also".

"and also" is redundant if it appears in the same sentence as "both"; this may be what you're thinking about.

i.e.,
X and also Y --> totally fine
both X and also Y --> redundant (and therefore incorrect)

hi,ron
Do you think that "and also" in choice A is right. I see something you said about the usage of "and also" .


"X and Y" is normally used to indicate two different things. (if you said "the first woman and the first Swedish writer", without the "also", that would normally imply 2 different people)

"X and also Y" is normally used to bestow two descriptions on the SAME person or thing (notice that both of these descriptions are meant to describe Selma Lagerlof).

After reading these words,I think "and also" is incorrect in choice A.Am I wrong?
thanks!

That's one reason to use "and also". Certainly there are others.
The point is that, under most circumstances, "and" is just fine. There should be some reason, normally related to immediate clarity, to append "also".

More importantly, this type of thing is tossed in there largely as a distraction.
If two forms are both acceptable"”"”and the differences between them are quite subtle (and/or related to style, rather than to actual concerns of mechanics or meaning)"”"”then, if they appear, their primary purpose is to pull your attention away from other, more important things. Watch out.

[JaneC643]

the posts here, for the most part, aren't accurate, except for choice (a). a previous poster correctly stated that choice (a) has incorrect subject-verb agreement (singular subject, plural verb).

--

the problem with (c) is NOT grammatical; the grammar of (c) is just fine.
the problem with (c) is that it uses two different transitions incorrectly.

* if you say "subject + clause + BY VERBing", then "by VERBing" must explain HOW the main clause occurred.
e.g.
i prepared for the test by reviewing takeaways on the MGMAT forums.
note that the boldface clause describes HOW i prepared for the test.

choice (c) means that using websites, etc. was how the industry organized the campaign -- in other words, they used the websites and public meetings to organize the campaign in the first place. that's an incorrect meaning.
(the campaign ITSELF used these things; the correct modifier in (a) and (b) shows that relationship.)

* if you say "subject + clause + IN VERBing", then subject + clause must be an ACTUAL PART of the action of VERBing.
e.g.
i solved all the problems in OG12 in preparing for the GMAT.
--> notice that solving the problems IS ACTUALLY PART OF preparing for the test.

choice (c) fails here, too, since organizing the campaign (the main clause) is not ACTUALLY PART OF convincing the government.

Hi, Ron,

I still do not know why " has organized the campaign" is not ACTUALLY PART of "convincing the government". I think the action of organizing the campaign is part of action of convincing the government. It sounds like, in order to convince the government, the industry organize the campaign.

Thank you

[RonPurewal]

It sounds like, in order to convince the government, the industry organize the campaign.

Thank you

^^
ironically, you've just made a perfect argument for why (c) is wrong.

note your (correct) use of "in order to"——a phrase that implies that something was done to enable something else to be done subsequently.
in other words, if "in order to ___" means something, then "in ___ing" will mean something totally different (and vice versa). given a specific intended meaning, they're mutually exclusive.

most commonly, one of the two will be nonsense. if both are sensible, their meanings will be substantially different.

[RonPurewal]

consider:

I began to telecommute in order to take care of my aging father.
(makes sense)

*I began to telecommute in taking care of my aging father.
(nonsense——telecommuting is not a part of caring for elders)

[RonPurewal]

or these:

I learned a great deal about human adrenergic receptors in order to study the chemistry and effects of drug X.
(makes sense, if the intended meaning is "to prepare for my studies of drug x, i learned a bunch of stuff about those receptors")

I learned a great deal about human adrenergic receptors in studying the chemistry and effects of drug X.
(also makes sense, but with a different meaning: "during my studies, i learned lots of new things about adrenergic receptors")

[thanghnvn]

I wish to understand the use of " in doing"

in some grammar books, "in doing" means "in the process of an action accompanying the main verb"

in other books, "in doing" means " as a result of an action" (books: advanced grammar in used, which can be downloaded from 4shared.com)

which use of "in doing" is correct? pls , help

[thanghnvn]

[quote="kramacha1979"]GPrep #1

The organic food industry has organized a successful grassroots campaign - using websites, public meetings , and also mass mailings - that have convinced the Department of agriculture to change the proposed federal regulations for organically grown food

A) using websites, public meetings , and also mass mailings - that have convinced

B) using websites, public meetings , and also mass mailings - that has convinced

C) by using websites, public meetings , and also mass mailings - in convincing

D) by the use of websites, public meetings, as well as mass mailings - that convinced

E) which used websites, public meetings , and mass mailings - in convincing

OA : B


Ron, I have a basic problem which I need you to make clear

B is correct and "using website..." modifies "campain". from this modification we can conclude that

dash can be used to show a modifier which modifies the immediately preceding noun.

DASH IS NOT SIMILAR TO COMMA IN THIS SENTENCE.

if dash is similar to comma, then choice B is

the industry organize the campain, using... , that has...

comma+doing never modifies the immediately preceding noun. So, comma+using must modify the main clause, not "campain" , and the sentence is wrong.

So. in this problem, DASH IS NOT SIMILAR TO COMMA.

pls, explain/confirm my thinking. Thank you very much

[RonPurewal]

"using", like "including", doesn't follow the normal rules for "__ing" modifiers.

when "using" is used in this kind of context (to describe the tools with which something is accomplished), its behavior is essentially identical to that of "with".
thus, you can think of this "using" as a preposition, like "with".

[RonPurewal]

for another example, check out #13 in OG 13th edition ("build walls using mud or clay").
to understand that sentence, we again need to consider "using" as identical to "with". (if we read it according to the usual standards for __ing modifiers, we get an absurd sentence that suggests that walls themselves are doing things with mud or clay.)

[RonPurewal]

and, finally, it's important to note that not all dashes play the grammatical role of commas.

in fact, given a sensible context, dashes can replace just about any piece of punctuation—commas, semicolons, colons, you name it.
they can even act in the same manner as parentheses, which themselves don't appear in official SC items. (OG 13th #132 is an instance in which dashes serve the same role as parentheses.)

[liu1993918]

choice (c) means that using websites, etc. was how the industry organized the campaign -- in other words, they used the websites and public meetings to organize the campaign in the first place. that's an incorrect meaning.
(the campaign ITSELF used these things; the correct modifier in (a) and (b) shows that relationship.)

choice (c) fails here, too, since organizing the campaign (the main clause) is not ACTUALLY PART OF convincing the government.

Dear instructors, It seems that these meaning issues above is fine to me.
I cannot find out what's wrong with the meaning of C, even you told the difference in B and C.
I am confused. Should I randomly guess one when I encounter the same situation in the future?

[RonPurewal]

you're not going to encounter exactly the same situation in the future.

[aflaamM589]

Quick question.
Does in verbing implies that the subject itself is performing the action of in verbing as is the case in by verbing construction?

If so, then C and E mean that food industry itself is doing the convincing; however, the intended meaning is that convincing is not directly ascribed to food industry but to campaign.
Appreciate any help on this.
Best.

[RonPurewal]

Quick question.
Does in verbing implies that the subject itself is performing the action of in verbing as is the case in by verbing construction?

If so, then C and E mean that food industry itself is doing the convincing; however, the intended meaning is that convincing is not directly ascribed to food industry but to campaign.
Appreciate any help on this.
Best.

the problems with "in ___ing", here, are already discussed exhaustively in this thread -- there really isn't much more that can be added to the existing discussion, as far as that modifier is concerned.
please read the discussion thread in its entirety.
thank you.