Since the start of space age, more and more littering

[RonPurewal]

Thanks.
What is the OA for this question?
Can you summarize what are the mistakes in each answer choice?
I am confused with so much information.

hi - the OA for this question is (b).

what do you already understand from the earlier posts in this thread? there are currently 16 posts, so i would guess that most of your issues have already been addressed somewhere on the thread.

if you have a couple of questions remaining, please post those specific questions; we can't recap all of the information on this entire thread. thanks.

[tiwarianizer]

Hi Ron

In choice A....

Use of "Due to " is better than use of "because of"..., and that will make A best among ohter choices.
Please comment..

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron

In choice A....

Use of "Due to " is better than use of "because of"..., and that will make A best among ohter choices.
Please comment..

nope. wrong in two ways, actually.

first of all, "due to" is NOT a substitute for "because of".
instead, "due to" is a direct substitute for "caused by".
in other words, if "due to" it is used correctly, then you MUST be able to replace it with "caused by" and have a correct sentence as a result. that's not the case here, so "due to" constitutes a genuine grammatical error.

second, you still have the same problem with a fallacious suggestion of cause and effect (see previous posts on this).

[ugenderr]

Choice A doesn't convey the right meaning. If I say that littering occurred 'because of' the intentional discarding of those items, that implies that the intentional discarding WASN'T the actual littering. Instead, it means that the intentional discarding set into motion a chain of events that LED to the littering.

For instance:
'The U.S. entered World War II because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor.' -- Correct: the bombing was an event that then LED to the U.S. decision to enter the war, but did not constitute the war itself.

'The U.S. destroyed Hiroshima because of dropping a nuclear bomb.' -- Incorrect: this sentence wrongly implies that the dropping of the bomb LED to some future event in which the U.S. destroyed Hiroshima, rather than that the dropping of the bomb WAS the actual event that destroyed Hiroshima.

In #C there's no NOUN that serves as the focus of the modifier 'resulting from...' (an adjective-type modifier). It's intended to modify the general idea that the orbits have become littered, but there's no NOUN that signifies the littering.

#D has the same problem as #A ('because' is wrong).

I agree with your explanation on why A is wrong logically, but , I think, we can also eliminate A grammatically. 'because' needs a clause, so there is no clause after 'because' in the modifier, making this option wrong.

[RonPurewal]

I agree with your explanation on why A is wrong logically, but , I think, we can also eliminate A grammatically. 'because' needs a clause, so there is no clause after 'because' in the modifier, making this option wrong.

nope.

"because" by itself should be followed by a clause, yes, but "because of" is just followed by a noun (or noun + modifiers). so that's not a problem here.

[pradeepchandy]

Ron,
in this post
a-study-of-food-resources-in-the-north-pacific-between-1989-t1061.html

its mentioned that "resulting from" cannot have comma before - Is that rule applicable here - or not (since we have often here, before "resulting from ")

I think the content posted in the above link may need to be edited in case its the former

Bump...

consensus is that you just can't have 'resulting from' after a comma.

you can have it as an adjective modifier, without a comma - as in the following sentence:
the flooding resulting from the abnormally strong storms had left six inches of standing water in the street.
note that the boldface is an adjective modifier, modifying 'flooding'.

it appears that on the gmat, as well as in standard written english in general, 'resulting from' after a comma is generally considered unacceptable.

--

choice b features the standard use of a prepositional phrase as an adverb modifier:
'(possibly) as a result of', like other prepositional phrases that follow commas, serves to modify the action of the preceding clause (i.e., were dwindling). this is totally standard usage, so make sure you know it.

[RonPurewal]

Ron,
in this post
a-study-of-food-resources-in-the-north-pacific-between-1989-t1061.html

its mentioned that "resulting from" cannot have comma before - Is that rule applicable here - or not (since we have often here, before "resulting from ")

yep, you can use that to rule out (c). nice find.

I think the content posted in the above link may need to be edited in case its the former

sorry, i didn't understand this part.

[7ewis.chen]

Choice A doesn't convey the right meaning. If I say that littering occurred 'because of' the intentional discarding of those items, that implies that the intentional discarding WASN'T the actual littering. Instead, it means that the intentional discarding set into motion a chain of events that LED to the littering.

For instance:
'The U.S. entered World War II because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor.' -- Correct: the bombing was an event that then LED to the U.S. decision to enter the war, but did not constitute the war itself.

'The U.S. destroyed Hiroshima because of dropping a nuclear bomb.' -- Incorrect: this sentence wrongly implies that the dropping of the bomb LED to some future event in which the U.S. destroyed Hiroshima, rather than that the dropping of the bomb WAS the actual event that destroyed Hiroshima.

In #C there's no NOUN that serves as the focus of the modifier 'resulting from...' (an adjective-type modifier). It's intended to modify the general idea that the orbits have become littered, but there's no NOUN that signifies the littering.

#D has the same problem as #A ('because' is wrong).

Hi, Ron! I totally understand your notion about the world because. I just want to know is there any grammatical problem in A?

Thanks in advance again!

[tim]

technically no, all the parts of speech and sentence structure elements are in the right place..

[gmatango]

Since the start of the space age, more and more littering has occurred in orbits near Earth, often because the intentional discarding lens caps, packing material, fuel tanks, and payload covers.

I have read the aforementioned explanations and totally appreciated them.

I have a small question regarding modifier highlighted above (since........ age), is it a noun modifier intended to modify the noun, orbit or is it a verb modifier modifying the verb, 'occupied' ?

Thanks
Akshay

[gmatango]

Hi, could anyone please take up my above query.

Thanks.

[saptadeepc]

Since the start of the space age, more and more littering has occurred in orbits near Earth, often because the intentional discarding lens caps, packing material, fuel tanks, and payload covers.

I have read the aforementioned explanations and totally appreciated them.

I have a small question regarding modifier highlighted above (since........ age), is it a noun modifier intended to modify the noun, orbit or is it a verb modifier modifying the verb, 'occupied' ?

Thanks
Akshay

I think prepositional phrases / subordinate clauses (modifiers) before the comma will modify the first noun or the subject of the sentence following the comma.

Here,

Since the start of the space age modifies orbits.

Tutors / Moderators, please correct me if I m wrong

[RonPurewal]

I think prepositional phrases / subordinate clauses (modifiers) before the comma will modify the first noun or the subject of the sentence following the comma.

this is incorrect.
your claim is true for many other kinds of initial modifiers that precede commas, but not for prepositional phrases. if you see a prepositional phrase before a comma, then that prepositional phrase modifies the entire clause that follows the comma.

for a discussion of the initial modifiers that *do* actually modify the following noun, see here:
post49102.html#p49102

[divyag04]

Is it true that the word "since" requires usage of Present Perfect ?
That being the case we can eliminate C and E.

[RonPurewal]

Is it true that the word "since" requires usage of Present Perfect ?
That being the case we can eliminate C and E.

if since is used in a sentence with a present point of view, then, yes, the main clause should be present perfect:
since i broke my leg, i have been reluctant to try inline skating again.

on the other hand, if the sentence is written from a past standpoint, then you'd use the past perfect:
I remember finding a scorpion in my shoe when I was ten years old. Since the age of three, I had been tremendously afraid of scorpions...
-- since i'm not ten years old anymore, this sentence is written from a past standpoint. therefore, past perfect. (you can only use the present perfect when the sentence views things from the standpoint of the present.)