Now that so much data travels via light

[RonPurewal]

when you're done there, read this (you'll link to another thread) as well as the post below it:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p112817

the modifier ...with this development maybe one day leading... cannot possibly work. the two timeframes are self-contradictory, just as in all of the examples at the above link.
(those examples are just comma + __ing—they don't have 'with'—but a moment's reflection should be enough for you to figure out that the relationship is the same.)

[RonPurewal]

more explicitly—
with + [noun] + __ing describes some sort of sub-component or aspect of the observation in the main sentence (see first link).
thus, (common sense says) the '__ing' must happen in the same timeframe as the main sentence. (it's a component/aspect OF that main observation, so it should be INSEPARABLE FROM the main action. it should be impossible to conceive of them as two different observations.)

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

more explicitly—
with + [noun] + __ing describes some sort of sub-component or aspect of the observation in the main sentence (see first link).
thus, (common sense says) the '__ing' must happen in the same timeframe as the main sentence. (it's a component/aspect OF that main observation, so it should be INSEPARABLE FROM the main action. it should be impossible to conceive of them as two different observations.)

I have 2 questions:

1. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + __ing used in similar way? I think they are quite similar because both describe the observation in the main sentence.

2. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + with + [noun] + __ing the same?

[RonPurewal]

1. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + __ing used in similar way?

i guess they're somewhat similar, but the first one has a new subject (the [noun] thing) whereas the second doesn't. so, generally speaking, only one of them will normally be possible.

e.g.,
I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs.
i'm the one who dropped the bags.
i'm also the one who (indirectly, via the act of dropping the bags) scared the dogs.
so i use comma + ___ing here, since it's all about me.

also, they don't have the same range of meanings.
comma __ing is very often used for an (immediate) consequence of an action, as in the sentence above. the 'with' construction should not be used for consequences.

[RonPurewal]

2. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + with + [noun] + __ing the same?

have you ever seen this without a comma? i'm betting no.

IF you ever do see such a construction (WITHOUT the comma), then the difference is the same as for __ing: your modifier is now describing a noun.

e.g.,
In Brazil, I saw spiders with arms extending almost 2 feet out from their bodies.

[sdfsdfsdfs481]

1. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + __ing used in similar way?

i guess they're somewhat similar, but the first one has a new subject (the [noun] thing) whereas the second doesn't. so, generally speaking, only one of them will normally be possible.

e.g.,
I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs.
i'm the one who dropped the bags.
i'm also the one who (indirectly, via the act of dropping the bags) scared the dogs.
so i use comma + ___ing here, since it's all about me.

also, they don't have the same range of meanings.
comma __ing is very often used for an (immediate) consequence of an action, as in the sentence above. the 'with' construction should not be used for consequences.

Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[HM537]

1. Are with + [noun] + __ing and comma + __ing used in similar way?

i guess they're somewhat similar, but the first one has a new subject (the [noun] thing) whereas the second doesn't. so, generally speaking, only one of them will normally be possible.

e.g.,
I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs.
i'm the one who dropped the bags.
i'm also the one who (indirectly, via the act of dropping the bags) scared the dogs.
so i use comma + ___ing here, since it's all about me.

also, they don't have the same range of meanings.
comma __ing is very often used for an (immediate) consequence of an action, as in the sentence above. the 'with' construction should not be used for consequences.

i also have no idea about how "with + [noun] + __ing" used, can you expain? thank you.

[RonPurewal]

read this (and the following post):
gas-electric-company-t7376-15.html#p102567

[drn354]

hi instructors,
I was wondering if the use of "which" in (B) is correct? I thought "which" should refer to the noun that near to it, so I kill (B)

Thanks in advance

[RonPurewal]

you are correct -- "which" is an error in that choice.