GMAT Prep: she was less successful after

[sinyuchen.828]

Nevertheless is strictly an adverb. You can't use it to connect two sentences.

Thank you so much！

[RonPurewal]

Sure.

[DiZ806]

She was less successful after she had emigrated to New York compared to her native Germany, photographer Lotte Jacobi nevertheless earned a small group of discerning admirers, and her photographs were eventually exhibited in prestigious galleries across the United States.
A.She was less successful after she had emigrated to New York compared to
B.Being less successful after she had emigrated to New York as compared to
C.Less successful after she emigrated to New York than she had been in
D.Although she was less successful after emigrating to New York when compared to
E.She had been less successful after emigrating to New York than in

I understand C:"Less successful after she emigrated to New York than she had been in " is right
I do not know if this sentense is expressed"Less successful after she emigrated to New York than in Native German" Right or Wrong ?
Though I can make the right choice about this question ,if I understand this knowledge what I referred above,I will gain expression about "THAN" to my writing and have a wholesome understanding about "THAN"using.
Thank you Ron

[RonPurewal]

sorry, i can't tell what you are actually asking... perhaps you can clarify.

(if you're asking about an answer choice that isn't actually there, that's generally an unproductive pastime; the choice that ARE there should present a sufficient challenge already.)

[DiZ806]

sorry, i can't tell what you are actually asking... perhaps you can clarify.

(if you're asking about an answer choice that isn't actually there, that's generally an unproductive pastime; the choice that ARE there should present a sufficient challenge already.)

Thank you Ron
If I change C-Choice to
"Less successful after she emigrated to New York than in
Native German"
"Less successful after she emigrated to New York than she in Native German"
two expressions above is still acceptable from the grammer requisition?

[RonPurewal]

while that wouldn't be technically wrong, it wouldn't be good enough to be a correct answer.

...so, as in 99.9% of these cases, the answer is "nope. but you don't need to know why."

DO NOT edit GMAC's sentences!
GMAT SC tests only a tiny fraction of the things that can potentially go wrong with an english sentence. if you try to "edit" one of gmac's sentences, you will almost certainly create things that are problematic, but that aren't tested on this exam.

[750plus]

Team,

I have a question here

She was less successful after she had emigrated to New York compared to her native Germany, photographer Lotte Jacobi nevertheless earned a small group of discerning admirers, and her photographs were eventually exhibited in prestigious galleries across the United States.

A) She was less successful after she had emigrated to New York compared to

B) Being less successful after she had emigrated to New York as compared to

C) Less successful after she emigrated to New York than she had been in

D) Although she was less successful after emigrating to New York when compared to

E) She had been less successful after emigrating to New York than in

------------------------

In the correct answer C, there is an opening modifier. This modifier ' Less successful after she emigrated to New York than she had been in ' both has a subject and a verb. How do I convince myself that this is not an Independent Clause.

Second, can a modifier be an independent clause.

Please help.

Many Thanks
Warm Regards

[RonPurewal]

* write it by itself.
* put a period after it.

is it a complete sentence?
if so, it can't be a modifier.

i bet you know, though, that "Less successful than xxxxx." is not a complete sentence.

[RonPurewal]

full disclosure:
i don't know the term 'independent clause', so i had to look it up on the internet.
from what i can see, it appears to be nothing more than a smart-kid way to say 'complete sentence'.

if that's actually what it means, then we should be good here (and, from now on, it might make more sense just to talk about 'complete sentences', rather than giving them fancy names that will get in the way of a simple understanding!).

[750plus]

full disclosure:
i don't know the term 'independent clause', so i had to look it up on the internet.
from what i can see, it appears to be nothing more than a smart-kid way to say 'complete sentence'.

if that's actually what it means, then we should be good here (and, from now on, it might make more sense just to talk about 'complete sentences', rather than giving them fancy names that will get in the way of a simple understanding!).

I should have written - ' a sentence that can stand on its own '. Some call it a clause that can stand independently. That's why independent clause.

Yes, I agree that it is not a sentence by itself. But can I classify it as a 'Sub group modifier'.

And I have picked 'Sub group modifier ' from Manhattan Guide. So, I hope we are good.

Regards

[RonPurewal]

sorry, i don't actually know that term either. |:

but, as long as the original question is 'Complete sentence or not?', i think we're good.

[750plus]

sorry, i don't actually know that term either. |:

but, as long as the original question is 'Complete sentence or not?', i think we're good.

yeah, but I wanted to learn whether I can categorise it as Subgroup Modifier. I'd like to take this opportunity to post the context directly from the Guide. I don't know if it's not allowed. Please delete the post if that's the case. Many Thanks!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub Group Modifiers: When you want to describe a part of a larger group with a modifier, use one of the following three

Subgroup Modifier constructions.
Right: This model explains all known subatomic particles, SOME OF WHICH WERE only recently discovered.
Right: This model explains all known subatomic particles, SOME OF THEM only recently discovered.
Right: This model explains all known subatomic particles, SOME only recently discovered.

Notice that only the which construction has a working verb (were) in it. In contrast, wrong answer choices often include the following three incorrect constructions, which scramble the correct forms.
Wrong: This model explains all known subatomic particles, OF WHICH SOME WERE only recently discovered.
Wrong: This model explains all known subatomic particles, SOME OF THEM WHICH WERE only recently discovered.
Wrong: This model explains all known subatomic particles, SOME OF WHICH only recently discovered.

In place of some, you can substitute the other SANAM pronouns (any, none, all, more/most), as well as many, each, either, neither, half, one, and any other number or pronoun that picks out a subgroup.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regards

[RonPurewal]

the only meaningful advice i can proffer here is 'Label it however you want.'

if you call something a 'subgroup modifier' and that actually helps you remember how it works, then, great! but i think this is extremely unlikely.
the more probable outcome is that the classification task will ACTIVELY INTERFERE WITH the learning process. that's exactly what is happening here—you clearly understand basically everything that can be understood about these modifiers, yet (for reasons i just don't understand) you're still dwelling on 'What are they called?'—a question that has absolutely zero potential to help you on the gmat exam (or just about anywhere else, for that matter).

[RonPurewal]

the actual observations here are:

• if you want to get technical, then the 'subgroup' label doesn't fit, because EACH XXXX is not a SUBgroup—it's the ENTIRE group.

• on the other hand, that difference (subgroup vs. entire group)—on which the NAME depends—has nothing to do with how the modifiers actually work.

if you have two modifiers that work in the same way, then there's no point at all in giving them two different labels (e.g., 'subgroup modifier' vs. 'whole-group modifier'), because THEY ARE THE SAME. they are ONE thing, not two.
in this case, by focusing on terminology, you have made the task substantially more complicated, in exchange for zero benefit—or, more likely, NEGATIVE benefit (since this whole thing leaves you with less brainpower for thinking about how stuff actually works).

'effort >>> 0, return ≤ 0' is not a good economic decision in any circumstance.

[RonPurewal]

actually, now that i think about it, the situation is even worse.
in the text you've copied, modifiers that don't work in the same way are being thrown into the same group!

i.e.,
'some of which' follows the same rules as 'which' (i think this is noted above).

BUT...
'some of them...' is not nearly so restricted.
this modifier CAN work like 'some of which...', but it can also modify more distant nouns, such as the previous subject.
e.g., Twenty employees moved abroad, some of them going to the Middle East and the rest going to Asia.
this sentence works.
if you try to replace 'some of them' with 'some of WHOM', though, it no longer works. (comma + ... + 'whom' has the same restrictions as 'which', except in regard to persons rather than things.)

...so it's weird to see these in a group. if i were unfamiliar with these, i'd see the grouping and think 'well, i guess these must all work the same way.'

i will raise this issue for the next edition of the books for sure.