A 10 min read

How does GMAC use this strategy: There are a finite number of commonly used modifiers.  These modifiers typically play a well-defined role.  You may find below the list of modifiers and what they typically modify.  E-GMAT customers may view the concept file “Types of Modifiers” to find more details on this topic.

Type of Modifier	What does it Modify?
Single-word adjective	Modifies the closest noun
Single-word adverb	Modifies the verb
Relative pronoun clause	Modifies the noun

• which, that – modify things
• who – modifies people
• whose – modifies people or things

Verb-ed modifier modifies the noun

Verb-ing modifier:

• If separated by a comma, modifies preceding clause and associates with the subject
• If separated by a comma, modifies the following clause or modifies only the subject
• If not separated by a comma, modifies the noun

Prepositional modifier modifies verb or noun – depending on the context

Noun + noun modifier modifies any aspect of the preceding clause

Let’s take a simple example below:

 

So here is the scene that I picture.  Cat is swift.  It caught the rat.  Now let’s check this sentence below.

 

Now the scene that I picture is – cat swiftly grabbed the rat.  So per this sentence, I no longer know whether the cat is generally swift or not.  But I do know that the cat acted swiftly and caught the rat.

So changing the modifier from “adjective” to “adverb” leads to change in the meaning communicated by the sentence.

This is exactly how GMAT may introduce a difference in meaning.

Now let’s take an official question:

The use of lie detectors is based on the assumption that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual that, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses.

1. that, in turn, create unconscious physiological responses
2. that create unconscious physiological responses in turn
3. creating, in turn, unconscious physiological responses
4. to create, in turn, physiological responses that are unconscious
5. who creates unconscious physiological responses in turn

Intended meaning from Choice A: The intended meaning of the sentence from choice A can be inferred as follows:

1. Use of lie detectors is based on a certain assumption.  Here is the assumption
2. Lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
3. These emotional reactions then create unconscious physiological responses. 

Note that “that clause” in this sentence clearly modifies – emotional reactions.  Yes, typically relative pronoun modifiers modify the closest noun.  However, they can also modify slightly far away noun when this noun is the head of the noun phrase and when such modification makes sense.  E-GMAT customers can find a detailed description of this concept in the concept file – Modifiers – Relative Pronouns.  Also, I cover this topic in excruciating detail in one of the live sessions in the Verbal Live Complete.

This choice is absolutely correct.  There are no grammatical and meaning based errors in this sentence.

Grammatically Correct but Incorrect choice (E) – Notice how in choice E the test makers have changed the modifier from “that clause” to “who clause”.  See, “who” modifiers cannot modify things.  They can only modify people.  So by changing ‘thing’ modifying modifier to ‘person’ modifying modifier, now automatically the entity being modified changes to “individual”.  Now the modifier no longer modifies “emotional reactions”. This changes the meaning.  This results in different yet still logical meaning.

 

The intended meaning communicated by Choice E is the following:

1. Use of lie detectors is based on a certain assumption.  Here is the assumption:
2. Lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
3. The individual then creates unconscious physiological responses.

Note that without subject matter knowledge, the above cause and effect sequence appears to be logical.  Lying produces certain reactions in the individual and then the individual unknowingly creates certain type of responses.

Thus, the meaning communicated by this choice is certainly different from the meaning communicated by choice A.  Hence, while choice E is grammatically correct, it changes the logical intended meaning and is not the correct choice.

PS: Access our free concepts on sentence structure if you want to know how to break a compound sentence into simple sentences. Just register at e-gmat.com

Now let’s take another official question.

Sound can travel through water for enormous distances, prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of boundaries in the ocean created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

1. prevented from dissipating its acoustic energy as a result of
2. prevented from having its acoustic energy dissipated by
3. its acoustic energy prevented from dissipating by
4. its acoustic energy prevented from being dissipated as a result of
5. preventing its acoustic energy from dissipating by

Intended meaning from Choice A:  The sentence is written in an awkward manner but we can certainly infer the intended meaning.

1. Sound can travel through water for long distances.
2. The acoustic energy of sound is prevented from dissipating because of the boundaries in the ocean.  These boundaries are created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.

Now it is logical to say that because of statement 2, statement 1 happens.  That is because the acoustic energy of sound is not dissipated easily, sound can travel through water for long distances.  At this point you can picture in your mind that these two facts can be connected in multiple ways:

1. Use connectors that state reason such as because, since.
2. Use modifier that extends the thought of preceding clause.

Error in the original choice: Choice A is not the correct choice since it is not written properly.

Choice C corrects this error and is the correct choice.  It uses noun + noun modifier construction to explain how sound can travel through water for long distances.  Notice that a noun + noun modifier construction is very versatile.  It can modify any aspect of the preceding clause.  It need not be necessarily connected to the subject of the clause.  This is what sets it apart from a verb-ing modifier which has been used in choice E.

 

Grammatically Correct but Incorrect choice E: Notice how the test makers have changed this modifier to verb-ing modifier.  As we discussed earlier, a verb-ing modifier when separated by a comma modifies the preceding clause but is connected with the subject of that clause.  It may also present the result of the action in the preceding clause.   Neither of these modifications in this sentence creates an illogical meaning.  Two possible interpretations are:

• Illogical meaning 1
  • Sound can travel through water for long distances.
  • Sound prevents its energy from dissipating because of the boundaries in the ocean.  These boundaries are created by water layers of different temperatures and densities.
    • This is illogical since sound itself does not prevent its energy from being dissipated.  The boundaries in the ocean prevent the energy of sound from being dissipated.
• Illogical meaning 2
  • Sound can travel through water for enormous distances
  • This leads to its energy being prevented from dissipation

 

So as you can see, by changing the modifier, the context of the sentence changes, resulting in this case in an illogical meaning.  Now at first look, this choice may appear to be correct since grammatically there are no errors.  However, since the correct choice must communicate intended logical meaning, this choice is not the correct answer.

1. Understand the logical meaning of the original choice.
   1. Note how the modifiers have been used.
   2. If the meaning is not clear in the original choice, then apply your knowledge of modifiers and determine the suitable modifier for the sentence.  Such pre-thinking helps when you review the answer choices.
   3. Look for the answer choice that best communicates the same meaning in un-ambiguous and grammatically correct manner.
   4. Ignore choices that may be grammatically correct but change the meaning.  A seemingly correct grammatical choice may also communicate an illogical meaning.

European leaders, who met until the early hours of Friday, agreed for signing, with the head of the World Bank, an intergovernmental treaty that would require it to enforce stricter fiscal and financial discipline in their future budgets

1. for signing, with the head of the World Bank, an intergovernmental treaty that would require it
2. to sign an intergovernmental treaty with the head of the world bank who would require them
3. to sign an intergovernmental treaty with the head of the world bank, requiring them
4. to sign, with the head of the world bank, an intergovernmental treaty that would require them
5. for signing an intergovernmental treaty with the head of the World Bank that would require them

Understand the Meaning of the Original Sentence

The sentence states the following:

• European leaders met until Friday morning
• They agreed to sign a treaty – an intergovernmental treaty.
• They agreed to sign this treaty with the head of the World Bank.
• This treaty would require the leaders to enforce stricter fiscal and financial discipline in their future budgets.
• European leaders,
  • who met until the early hours of Friday,
  • agreed for signing, with the head of the World Bank, an intergovernmental treaty
  • that would require it to enforce stricter fiscal and financial discipline in their future budgets.

Find the Errors in the Original Sentence

The sentence has been simplified into its clauses as shown above.   All subject-verb pairs are accounted for.  The pronoun “it” in underlined portion of the sentence logically refers to “European leaders” but does not agree in number with its antecedent.  Thus, this sentence has pronoun-antecedent number agreement error.  Notice that the other pronoun “their” in non-underlined portion also logically refers to “European leaders”.  The context of the sentence requires both these pronouns to refer to the “leaders”.  Furthermore, the expression “for signing” is not appropriate.  The sentence expresses an intention here – leaders agreed to do something.  Thus, the more appropriate expression is “to sign”.

Review Answer choices to do POE

Choice B – Even though this choice is grammatically correct, it is not the correct answer since it distorts the meaning of the original sentence.  The sentence per choice B implies that the head of the World Bank would require the leaders to enforce stricter rules.  Even though this is logical, it is not what the original sentence states.  Per the original sentence, it is the treaty that will enforce these regulations.

Choice C – This choice is grammatically correct but it no longer communicates the logical intended meaning of the sentence.  By changing the “that modifier” into a “verb-ing modifier”, this sentence now implies that merely by agreeing to sign this treaty would result in enforcement of stricter controls and regulations.   This is clearly not the logical sense.

Choice D – Correct choice.

Choice E – This choice repeats the “for signing” error as in choice A.  Furthermore, the structure of this choice is such that now it is no longer clear what would require the leaders to enforce stricter controls. – the World Bank or the treaty.  Notice carefully the change in placement of the modifiers in this choice.

Takeaways

1. Understand the intended meaning of the sentence well before you review the answer choices.  If you do not do so, you may mark the seemingly correct choice as the correct answer when this choice, in fact, changes the meaning of the sentence.
2. Notice carefully any change in the modifier structure itself.  The changed modifier may change the meaning of the sentence while still being grammatically correct and/or logically sound.
3. Use “to verb” to present intention.

DARPA’s Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle can fly as fast as 6X the speed of sound and can attack a target 2000 miles away in 30 minutes, its engine’s thrust prevented from dissipating in the stratosphere by its conical unibody design.

1. its engine’s thrust prevented from dissipating in the stratosphere by its conical unibody design
2. preventing its engine’s thrust from dissipating in the stratosphere because of its conical unibody design
3. preventing the dissipation of its engine’s thrust in the stratosphere due to its conical unibody design
4. prevented its engine’s thrust from being dissipated in the stratosphere by its conical unibody design
5. its engine’s thrust is prevented from  being dissipated in the stratosphere because of its conical unibody design

Understand the Meaning of the Original Sentence

The sentence presents a fact about DARPA’s Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (FHTV).  It states that this vehicle can fly as fast as 6 times the speed of sound.  It can attack a target 2000 miles away in 30 minutes.  Then the sentence presents the reason why such performance is achievable.  The engine’s thrust is prevented from being dissipated in the stratosphere.  This is because of the conical unibody design.

Find the Errors in the Original Sentence

• DARPA’s Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle can fly as fast as 6X the speed of sound and can attack a target 2000 miles away in 30 minutes, its engine’s thrust prevented from dissipating in the stratosphere by its conical unibody design.

This sentence contains a single clause with the SV pair highlighted.  The underlined portion of the sentence contains a modifier – a noun + noun modifier structure.  This modifier provides further information about how the vehicle can fly this fast and can attack this fast and this far away.  The sentence has no grammatical errors and communicates the meaning very clearly.

Review Answer choices to do POE

Choice B – Even though grammatically correct, this choice distorts the meaning of the sentence since now it uses “verb-ing modifier” in place of “noun + noun modifier”.  Thus instead of now presenting a mechanism of how the vehicle is this fast, it presents the following two meanings, both of which are illogical:

1. The vehicle itself prevents its thrust from dissipating – Illogical.
2. The vehicle goes this fast and this results in preventing its thrust from dissipating. – Reversed causal relationship – hence illogical.

Choice C – Same errors as in Choice B.  Furthermore, “due to” is not used correctly.  Here it may illogically imply that the dissipation of thrust is due to conical design.

Choice D – Use of verb-ed modifier in this sentence is not correct.  Typically these modifiers are used to modify the nouns.  Even if they are used to modify the clauses, they associate with the subject of the clause, and this is non-sensical in the context of this sentence as discussed in choice B analysis.

Choice E – This choice connects two independent clauses using a comma. However, a semicolon should be used.  Furthermore, this choice is very wordy.

Takeaways

1. Understand the meaning of the original sentence and determine the role of each modifier.
2. Be cautious of change of structure of modifiers since such changes even though grammatically correct may distort the meaning of the sentence.

Here’s a list of the articles in the complete series:

1. 5 Strategies that GMAT uses to distort meaning – Part 1 – Modifiers (Update 2018)
2. GMAT and Meaning – Part 2: Strategy 2 – Use of Modifiers
3. GMAT and Meaning – Part 3: Strategy 3 – Change of Conjunctions
4. GMAT and Meaning – Part 4: Strategy 4 – Change of Voice
5. GMAT and Meaning – Part 5 – Change/Remove Words that provide Context

If you are planning to take the GMAT, we can help you with a personalized study plan and give you access to quality online content to prepare. Write to us at acethegmat@e-gmat.com. We are the most reviewed GMAT prep company on gmatclub with more than 2400 reviews and are the only prep company that has delivered more than 700+ scores than any other GMAT club partner. Why don’t you take a free trial and judge for yourself?