That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during

[RonPurewal]

Do we have a meaning error in

B Twenty-one ceramic dog figurines discovered at the excavation

or only Subject Verb issue?( non underlined part has 'has' in it)

ya, there's also a problem with the meaning there. (the figurines themselves didn't just magically double the number; the discovery of those figurines did.)

[Tadashi]

Hi Ron.
Although I've read all your post about this SC problem, I still have a question.

Sentence1: That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during the excavation (PS. I changed excavating to excavation) of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.

Sentence2: The discovery of twenty-one ceramic dog figurines during the excavation of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.

I can't understand why sentence 1 is inferior to sentence 2.
IMO,
in S1, that clause describes a fact which has the exactly same logic meaning as "the discovery" does.

I don't understand why discovery can match the verb double, while a fact which is presented in a that clause can't.

Please help me.
ARIGATO.
Tadashi.

[RonPurewal]

This is not easy to explain, but I'll try.

"The VERBing of X" refers to the actual event/situation/action of "VERBing X".
"That X was VERBed", on the other hand, refers to the abstract notion that this event/situation/action has happened. It does NOT refer directly to the action itself (hence why it's so circumlocutory).

It's always easier to explain by analogy. So, here's an analogy:

Your singing in church today was nice.
"”> Here, the actual singing was nice. I.e., it was good singing. (A judge would give a good score to your rendition of the song(s).)

That you sang in church today was nice.
"”> Here, I'm saying that the fact that you sang today was nice. E.g., you've never tried before, so I'm proud of the fact that you got up and sang. Something like that.
Note"”I am making no statement whatsoever about whether your actual singing was good. Even if your singing was an atrocity"”so bad that it caused physical pain to my ears"”I can still make this statement if I have the feelings described above.

If you make an analogy here, you'll see why you have to be talking about the discovery itself, not about the abstract notion that a discovery was made.

I hope this all makes sense.

[Tadashi]

DOMO ARIGATO, Ron.
I am sure that I can never find such an expert in GMAT as you in Japan.
I will recommend all my friends & colleagues who are interested in preparing GMAT to visit MGMAT forum.
Your explanation are really helpful especially to those who are not native speakers.
Tadashi.

[xiaolanjingheleaf]

also, "discovering" is worse than "the discovery", for the reasons stated here:
post60923.html#p60923

Hi, RON. I read your link but still have a question. In that link, the v-ing is not the subject of the sentence. Does the same rule apply to the subject of the sentence?

I feel it is more similar to the subtle difference between using a that clause for subject and using the noun form of a verb, when it is a subject.

Thanks Ron!

[RonPurewal]

also, "discovering" is worse than "the discovery", for the reasons stated here:
post60923.html#p60923

Hi, RON. I read your link but still have a question. In that link, the v-ing is not the subject of the sentence. Does the same rule apply to the subject of the sentence?

I feel it is more similar to the subtle difference between using a that clause for subject and using the noun form of a verb, when it is a subject.

Thanks Ron!

The __ing noun form described in that link is essentially the same as what's described above.

However, the link contrasts the __ing noun form with "the __ing of (noun)"; my previous post here contrasts the __ing noun form with "that (noun) is/was __ed".

By combining the two references, you have insights into three different constructions:
* Discovering the statues... (= usually implies some personal/direct involvement on the part of the subject);
* The discovery of the statues... (= refers directly to the event itself, but implies no special connection to the subject);
* That the statues were discovered... (= an abstract notion, as described above).

"More similar" shouldn't be a thing here, since each of the two posts compares the noun form to a different construction.

[xiaolanjingheleaf]

also, "discovering" is worse than "the discovery", for the reasons stated here:
post60923.html#p60923

Hi, RON. I read your link but still have a question. In that link, the v-ing is not the subject of the sentence. Does the same rule apply to the subject of the sentence?

I feel it is more similar to the subtle difference between using a that clause for subject and using the noun form of a verb, when it is a subject.

Thanks Ron!

The __ing noun form described in that link is essentially the same as what's described above.

However, the link contrasts the __ing noun form with "the __ing of (noun)"; my previous post here contrasts the __ing noun form with "that (noun) is/was __ed".

By combining the two references, you have insights into three different constructions:
* Discovering the statues... (= usually implies some personal/direct involvement on the part of the subject);
* The discovery of the statues... (= refers directly to the event itself, but implies no special connection to the subject);
* That the statues were discovered... (= an abstract notion, as described above).

"More similar" shouldn't be a thing here, since each of the two posts compares the noun form to a different construction.

Thanks Ron! It's really helpful to compare these three different constructions altogether!

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

[eggpain24]

Hi RON

in choice C

is it “Discovering twenty-one ceramic dog figurines ” much more inferior than the correct choice or is it outright wrong？

I think “verbing” serve as the subject of the clause → emphasized more on action rather than on the noun （namely the discovery）

thank you！

[RonPurewal]

Hi RON

in choice C

is it “Discovering twenty-one ceramic dog figurines ” much more inferior than the correct choice or is it outright wrong？

I think “verbing” serve as the subject of the clause → emphasized more on action rather than on the noun （namely the discovery）

thank you！

This issue is covered on the first page of this thread.

[TingP565]

The discovery of twenty-one ceramic dog figurines during the excavation of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.

Hi, Ron,
I wonder to know why there is a comma between the two clauses, is it because the modifier after the subject is too long?

[RonPurewal]

that's just the convention followed in english when you have city + state (or city + country, or state + country, or neighborhood + city, or...) in the middle of a sentence.

e.g.,
Sam left his home in Red Hook, Brooklyn, and moved to Houston, Texas, soon after the big storm hit New York.

[RonPurewal]

incidentally, there is a zero percent chance that you'll actually be tested on such conventions. (there's a reason that "Tempe, AZ," is not in the underlined part.)

[RonPurewal]

in fact, this exam will not test the presence/absence of punctuation at all. this is but one example of what you don't have to worry about.

[aflaamM589]

That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during the excavating of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.
A.That twenty-one ceramic dog figurines were discovered during the excavating
B.Twenty-one ceramic dog figurines discovered at the excavation
C.Discovering twenty-one ceramic dog figurines at the excavating
D.Ceramic dog figurines, twenty-one of which were discovered during excavating
E.The discovery of twenty-one ceramic dog figurines during the excavation

Source:GMAT Prep

Besides the errors mentioned ,are double V-ing constructions in A and D also problematic?