"such as" in "Bethlehem Steel"

[dongxu]

SC:The steel industry has changed radically over the last two decades, as large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel once conducted operations from mining at one end of the process to shipping at the other have greatly downsized, or in some cases shut down altogether.
A as large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel
B as large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
C with large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
D while large, integrated companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, that
E and large, integrated companies such as Bethlehem Steel

Question taking from the GMAT prep,OA is B,i choose right,but i want some concrete reasons for the answers.In my line of reasoning, the difference between A and B is "companies conducted ...have downsized",we cannot write two action verbs without conjunctive,such as "and,but...".so B is incorrect.The "that+clause " in A modifies the companies,so A is right.
But my question is :
1)whether the "that" in a relative clause (in answer A)can be omitted?
2)for A and B,is "Agreement" the key to solve this problem?
i.e. large companies such as B steel has downsized. In this sentence ,the "such as" without comma ,the subject is B steel
large companies ,such as B steel, have downsized.In this sentence ,the "such as" with comma ,the subject is companies,so the correct answer is B ,for have downsized in unlined part of sentence?

THANKS 董旭

[RonPurewal]

1/
If "that" introduces a modifier, it can NEVER be left out. If it is left out, you're left with subject + verb (an entirely different construction).
E.g., the book that was released yesterday is just a noun + modifier. The book was released yesterday is a complete sentence.

I don't know what "relative clause" means, so I can't tell you whether that would affect the question.

[RonPurewal]

2/
Yes, "companies" (plural) <--> "have downsized" (plural).

[dongxu]

2/
Yes, "companies" (plural) <--> "have downsized" (plural).

thanks,Ron.
Moreover,
how about the following statement that i have answered,is it right?
i.e. large companies such as B steel has downsized. In this sentence ,the "such as" without comma ,the subject is B steel
large companies ,such as B steel, have downsized.In this sentence ,the "such as" with comma ,the subject is companies,

[RonPurewal]

2/
Yes, "companies" (plural) <--> "have downsized" (plural).

thanks,Ron.
Moreover,
how about the following statement that i have answered,is it right?
i.e. large companies such as B steel has downsized. In this sentence ,the "such as" without comma ,the subject is B steel
large companies ,such as B steel, have downsized.In this sentence ,the "such as" with comma ,the subject is companies,

No, yes.

In both of these examples, "such as xxxx" is a modifier, and so can be ignored in considering the core sentence structure.

"Such as xxxx" is ALWAYS a modifier. It can NEVER be the subject of a verb that follows it, unless there's another modifier embedded into it (e.g., "such as xxxx that ____" or "such as xxxx, which ____").

[RonPurewal]

Also, bear in mind that the GMAT does not test the presence/absence of punctuation.

[JatinB86]

Hi Ron,
Could you please explain all the answer options in detail.

My main doubt is:
what is that referring to ?

Thanks and Regards,
Jatin

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,
Could you please explain all the answer options in detail.

well... no. (:

the point of this forum is to answer specific questions about specific constructions in specific answer choices.

which construction(s) are you having trouble understanding? what's your current understanding? what doesn't make sense? etc.

[RonPurewal]

My main doubt is:
what is that referring to ?

• in which answer choice?

• ... and, in that answer choice, what's your understanding of how that modifier works?
in context, what's your understanding of what it should stand for?

[ShashankB122]

Hi Ron,

D and E are clearly out. Discussing A, B & C, I have 3 doubts in my approach to this problem:-

1. Use of AS/WITH : Large companies downsizing is an example of change or change is because large companies are downsizing? In my view if downsizing is just an example than usage of WITH is OK. In my view AS is used to imply cause and effect relationship. --> Please clarify.

2. usage of THAT or w/o THAT: i think THAT is required beacause "once conducted .... others" should act as a modifier else its a grammar issue. M i correct?

3. THAT modifying plural subject: This doubt is not particular to this problem. In this problem THAT clearly refers to Bethlehem Steel i.e. acting modifer of a modifier. But my doubt is about using THAT to modify plural subjects i.e. One of the Xs that.... here that modifies plural subject and requires a plural verb. Is this OK? Shouldn't we use THOSE in place of THAT?

Please clarify. There are some rules that haunt me regularly. Here also i am using that to modify plural subject.

[harika.apu]

Hi Ron ,
why is option C incorrect ?
although it seems correct to me
i interpreted it in this way -


with "as" in option B - the steel industry... changed as companies .... - here it means sole reason steel industry changed was large , integrated companies have downsized or shut down

with "with" in option C - steel industry changed .. with large ,integrated companies - here it means steel industry changed because large companies have downsized or shut down + additional reasons why the steel industry changed

From above two , is the intended meaning the first one ?

[RonPurewal]

it's good that you are thinking about meaning.
ironically, though, choice C is wrong for purely mechanical reasons (= issues that have nothing to do with meaning).

the problem here is overall structure: the correct answer is a sentence, but choice C is not a sentence.

if we strip off the modifiers, leaving the "skeleton" (= core structure) of each choice, here's what we get:

B/
The industry has changed, as companies have downsized or shut down.
--> this is a sentence.

C/
The industry has changed, with companies have downsized or shut down.
--> this is not a sentence ("with" can't be followed by a complete sentence).

[RonPurewal]

importantly, you don't have to think about this ^^ at random. (if you were to consider the overall structure of every problem-- regardless of whether you had a good reason to do so-- you'd squander a huge amount of time.)

here you have "with" vs. "as".

• "with" is followed by a noun (or noun + modifiers), and NEVER by a complete sentence.

• "as", in this context, connects two complete sentences.
(there are other uses of "as" in which it can be followed by a noun-- e.g., I dressed as Britney Spears for the costume party-- but those uses have completely different meanings.)

even if you can't articulate this difference explicitly, you should be able to discover it, on the spot, by quickly formulating a couple of simple examples with "with" and a couple others with "as". then, by comparing the choices to your examples, you'll discover that choice C is, in fact, not a sentence.

[harika.apu]

importantly, you don't have to think about this ^^ at random. (if you were to consider the overall structure of every problem-- regardless of whether you had a good reason to do so-- you'd squander a huge amount of time.)

here you have "with" vs. "as".

• "with" is followed by a noun (or noun + modifiers), and NEVER by a complete sentence.

• "as", in this context, connects two complete sentences.
(there are other uses of "as" in which it can be followed by a noun-- e.g., I dressed as Britney Spears for the costume party-- but those uses have completely different meanings.)

even if you can't articulate this difference explicitly, you should be able to discover it, on the spot, by quickly formulating a couple of simple examples with "with" and a couple others with "as". then, by comparing the choices to your examples, you'll discover that choice C is, in fact, not a sentence.

Thanks a ton Ron It was really helpful.

[tim]

Glad to hear it!