GMATPREP: Charles Lindbergh, for his attempt...

[kiranck007]

Hi,

Very reluctant to have any extra weight on his plane when he attempted his solo transatlantic flight, Charles Lindbergh

I think there is a tense change. Is it meaningful? or is it "to have" is an infinitive serving some other functionality?

[tim]

"to have" is an infinitive. Infinitives inherently have no tense.

[lindaliu9273]

Thank you very much for all the helpful explanation.
After reading the posts, I begin to doubt many usages in daily life. Becasue something starts with "being" seems to be common.
I eliminate E because I think it should be "be reluctant to".
EX: I am reluctant to register for the course>>>>>correct
I reluctant to register for the course>>>>>incorrect
And E miss the "be",so it's wrong.

Is it correct that although some idiom has to include "be", the "being" should always be eliminated if it's placed at the beginning of modifier.

Ex: Being able to graduate from MIT, he got a good position.---->is it incorrect?

Able to graduate from MIT, he got a good position.---->is it correct?

Thank you so much and hope for your reply!

[RonPurewal]

Thank you very much for all the helpful explanation.
After reading the posts, I begin to doubt many usages in daily life. Becasue something starts with "being" seems to be common.

Spoken English and written English are two different languages. To get from one to the other, you need to translate.

If written English closely resembled spoken English, it wouldn't be on the GMAT. (If that were true, then the test would have an unavoidable bias against foreign aspirants.)

Written English has a worldwide total of zero native speakers.
It's a second language for everyone.

[RonPurewal]

I eliminate E because I think it should be "be reluctant to".
EX: I am reluctant to register for the course>>>>>correct
I reluctant to register for the course>>>>>incorrect
And E miss the "be",so it's wrong.

"Very reluctant..." is a modifier.

The whole point of modifiers is that modifiers are not verbs. Nor do they have to be derived from verbs.

Joan, drunk from the office party, passed out on the couch.
Drunk from the office party, Joan passed out on the couch.
Adjectives ("reluctant", "drunk", etc.) are specifically designed to modify nouns; in fact, that's their entire job description. So, they function perfectly well as modifiers of nouns, too.

[RonPurewal]

Is it correct that although some idiom has to include "be", the "being" should always be eliminated if it's placed at the beginning of modifier.

Not always.
If "being" is actually an action verb, then you'll need to keep it.
E.g.,
Being stubborn just to annoy his mother, Gabriel refused to eat the vegetables even though he liked them.
Here, "being stubborn" (= essentially the same as "acting stubborn") is an action verb. It describes what Gabriel was doing at the time.

If you remove "being", leaving "Stubborn just to...", then you're saying something completely different: that Gabriel is constitutionally stubborn.
You're saying that stubbornness is a fundamental component of his personality, rather than simply what he was doing at one particular juncture.

[RonPurewal]

Ex: Being able to graduate from MIT, he got a good position.---->is it incorrect?

Able to graduate from MIT, he got a good position.---->is it correct?

Assuming that the person actually graduated before getting the job, neither makes sense. You'd instead write something like "Having graduated..."

But, "being able to..." can't reasonably be an action verb (i.e., it can't describe how someone was acting in a given situation, like "being stubborn" above). So, you are correct: this modifier won't work.

[lindaliu9273]

Ron, thanks a lot for your patient reply.

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

[thanghnvn]

[quote="flavioc"]Charles Lindbergh, for his attempt at a solo transatlantic flight, was very reluctant to have any extra weight on his plane, he therefore refused to carry even a pound of mail, despite being offered $1,000 to do so.

A. Charles Lindbergh, for his attempt at a solo transatlantic flight, was very reluctant to have any extra weight on his plane, he therefore
B. When Charles Lindbergh was attempting his solo transatlantic flight, being very reluctant to have any extra weight on his plane, he
C. Since he was very reluctant to carry any extra weight on his plane when he was attempting his solo transatlantic flight, so Charles Lindbergh
D. Being very reluctant to carry any extra weight on his plane when he attempted his solo transatlantic flight was the reason that Charles Lindbergh
E. Very reluctant to have any extra weight on his plane when he attempted his solo transatlantic flight, Charles Lindbergh


I want to analyse D more.

"being" in D is not prefered to be a subject. this means if we can avoid doing as an subject, we do so. here we can avoid, choose e.

"is the reason that" is wrong grammatically. it should be" is the reason for which". " for reason" is the idiom.

am I correct?
pls tell me more error in d. Thank you

[RonPurewal]

"is the reason that" is wrong

this kind of construction is generally reserved for OBJECTS of verbs.
e.g., if I painted a mural, I could write the mural that I painted...

here, this usage creates a nonsense construction.
the reason that lindbergh refused... implies that lindbergh said "no" to a reason ("refused a reason"). that doesn't make sense.

this kind of thing is on the exam almost certainly as a strike against native speakers of english, who, when they talk, use similar constructions VERY frequently.
e.g., a married couple might talk (literally, out loud) about "the day that we met"--but, in writing, that construction implies that they "met a day". nonsense.

on the other hand, this sentence...
May 10 was the day that I wasted visiting houses I couldn't afford
...is perfectly correct, since the writer is (correctly) asserting that (s)he wasted the day.

[JaneC643]

"is the reason that" is wrong

This kind of construction is generally reserved for objects of verbs. E.g., if I painted a mural, I could write the mural that I painted...

Here, this usage creates a nonsense construction. The reason that Lindbergh refused... implies that Lindbergh said "no" to a reason ("refused a reason"). Doesn't make sense.

When this kind of thing is tested, it's almost certainly there as a strike against native speakers of English, who use similar constructions VERY frequently in spoken English.
E.g., a married couple might talk (literally, out loud) about "the day that we met""”"”but, in writing, that construction implies that they "met a day". Nonsense.

Hi, Ron,
Can I say " the reason why Lindbergh refused..."?
Thanks

[igokgoz]

Actually no, you did not use ANY correct reasons in determining why you made the right decisions. "being" is not a self-destruct button for answer choices, although anytime you see it you should ask yourself whether you can find a reason why it's wrong. In this case "being" is not correctly used as a modifier in B or a a subject in D (ask yourself what it is doing in the sentence - this will often help). A needs a semicolon before introducing another independent clause. C has both a "since" and a "so" when only one is needed (and therefore it is wrong to use both)..

in answer choice A: second part that began with , he therefore is not independent clause, it is subordinate clause ! am I right?

[RonPurewal]

i don't know that terminology.

in any case, there's little point in trying to break down the components of choice A, since the structure of choice A is illegal in the first place.

choice A is (complete sentence) + comma + (another complete sentence).
the words you've cited are the beginning of the second complete sentence. bad.

[gbyhats]

Hi Dear Manhattan Instructors ;)

I have two questions

1/

(2). "being" starts off a comma + present participle modifier, which, although properly modifies Charles Lindbergh, is not a consequence of the previous clause.[/color]

in general, you shouldn't start a modifier with "being".
check whether you can eliminate "being"!
Being very reluctant to do X, Jim...
--> Very reluctant to do X, Jim...

I'm probably making a mistake here, but: I think we cannot delete "being" in choice (D), right?

--

The sentence structure of choice (D) like this:

[element A] is the reason that [element B]

--> e.g. [heavy rain last night] is the reason that [clothes hanging outside are wet].

Thus, [element A] and [element B] should both be something. However, if "being" in choice (D) is taken away, [element A] becomes a modifier.

--

2/

Well, I have to acknowledge that the phrase "...is the reason that..." itself is wrong, as Ron point out that it makes the clause goes after it modifiers "reason".

hmm, so it leads to another question that JaneC643 had asked: If we change "the reason that" to "the reason why". Is "the reason why" acceptable in GMAT?