when the ability vs when to be able

[gauravtyagigmat]

The coyote is one of several recent ecological success stories: along with the white-tailed deer, the moose, and other species that are enlarging their natural domains, they have established themselves as supreme adapters in an era when the capability to adjust to the environmental changes wrought by human beings has created a whole new class of dominant large mammals.


A. they have established themselves as supreme adapters in an era when the
capability
B. they have established themselves as being supreme adapters in an era when
being able
C. it has established itself as a supreme adapter in an era when to be able
D. it has established itself as being a supreme adapter in an era when its ability
E. it has established itself as a supreme adapter in an era when the ability

With reference to following post
[url]post93698.html[/url]

OA is E
I was stuck between option C and E

I agree "to be able to" is wordy


VAN patterns are discussed in SC MGMAT book in chapter 11

VAN stands for verb > adjective > noun.It says if we are stuck between two options.in that case we should prefer verb over adjective or noun

but my question is
according to VAN patter 4 Adjective is better than the noun
page 213

I am to be able to adjust
here underline part is adjective

I have ability to adjust
here ability is noun

than how come option C is incorrect and E is correct

is all above is exception to VAN 5?
Please explain what understanding i am lacking ?

[RonPurewal]

VAN patterns are discussed in SC MGMAT book in chapter 11

Ok, so I went and looked at these. To be frank, I think that this entire group of explanations is needlessly complex -- you can summarize every single example in that entire section with "If you can express the same idea with fewer words, that's better than using more words."

The only caveat is that you can't pick a shorter phrasing that changes the meaning.

So, yeah, don't worry about those patterns.

[RonPurewal]

--

As far as using "to ___" as a noun --

The use of "to ___" as a noun is limited to abstract, hypothetical, or general instances of ___.
E.g.,
One of Anne's goals is to get married. (hypothetical)
But...
Anne says that getting married was the best thing she ever did. (not hypothetical -- she actually did this)

Similarly,
To take care of a pet is to have unconditional love. (abstract)
But...
Taking care of a pet is a substantial time commitment. (not abstract -- considered in concrete terms)

To make mistakes is human. (general / abstract)
But...
Making mistakes will cause you to receive a lower grade on your exam. (one specific instance)

Notice that I'm just throwing a bunch of examples at you here, because it's essentially impossible to state a coherent rule for this. It is what it is. If you understand the differences between these pairs of examples, then you're good.

In this problem, "to be able" doesn't work, because this sentence describes a very concrete consequence of the ability in question.

[varunc12]

C. it has established itself as a supreme adapter in an era when to be able

E. it has established itself as a supreme adapter in an era when the ability

With reference to following post
[url]post93698.html[/url]

OA is E
I was stuck between option C and E

Hi Ron,
If we were to distinguish between choice C and E, in other words "ability" and "to be able", can we also rely on the verb that comes AFTER a bunch of modifiers.
In this case:
.....it has established itself ... in an era when "to be able"/"the ability" to adjust <to the environmental changes> <wrought by human beings> has created.....
Everything within <> is a modifier, and we are left with "has created". Clearly, "to be able has created" does not make any sense. Rather "the ability has created" makes sense.

Is this interpretation also correct to filter choice C ?
Also, is "has created a whole new class of dominant large mammals" a verb phrase in which "has created" is a verb, "created" is a past participle, and "a whole new class of dominant large mammals" the object of the verb "has created" ?
Kindly clear my doubt. Thanks.

[varunc12]

Experts, Thoughts ?

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,
If we were to distinguish between choice C and E, in other words "ability" and "to be able", can we also rely on the verb that comes AFTER a bunch of modifiers.
In this case:
.....it has established itself ... in an era when "to be able"/"the ability" to adjust <to the environmental changes> <wrought by human beings> has created.....
Everything within <> is a modifier, and we are left with "has created". Clearly, "to be able has created" does not make any sense. Rather "the ability has created" makes sense.

The difference between "to + verb", used as a noun, and "verbING", used as a noun, is explained in the post directly above yours. Please read it, if you haven't already.

Because of that meaning difference, yes, it's unlikely that "to + verb" would make sense as the subject of a verb as concrete as "created".

[RonPurewal]

Also, is "has created a whole new class of dominant large mammals" a verb phrase in which "has created" is a verb, "created" is a past participle, and "a whole new class of dominant large mammals" the object of the verb "has created" ?
Kindly clear my doubt. Thanks.

It should be clear that "has created" is a verb and that "a whole new class..." is its object.

I don't know the other terminology. You've already classified "has created" as a verb, though, so I'm not sure why you're trying to classify the same words as something else.