[like] + [noun] + [-ing]

[DavinG757]

Ron mentioned in one of his study halls that the construction [preposition] + [noun] + [ing] is generally wrong. Can the same be said for [like] + [noun] + [ing]?

The following problem is from Kaplan. D is the official answer. Is [like] + [noun] + [ing] an acceptable construction in general, or is D just the "least" incorrect among the answer choices?


[redacted]

[RonPurewal]

Ron mentioned in one of his study halls that the construction [preposition] + [noun] + [ing] is generally wrong.

see, this is why it's dangerous to just memorize things at random, without learning WHY they are the way they are.

that construction doesn't usually work because, in most contexts, it's trying to refer to the __ing action.
e.g., There's no proof of cell phones causing cancer.
--> this construction is wrong, because, grammatically, we have to process it as "there's no proof of cell phones (+ modifier)". and that's nonsense.

to refer to that whole idea, rather than just the noun, we have the "that..." construction:
There's no proof that cell phones cause cancer.
(correct sentence)

--

if you actually ARE referring to just the noun, then the former kind of thing is perfectly fine:
I took a picture of my cousin playing hockey.
--> this sentence is fine, because "i took a picture of my cousin" is actually true.

[RonPurewal]

so, since "like" MUST be followed by a noun, there shouldn't ever be a structural issue with "like + noun + (modifier)".

[RonPurewal]

and, kaplan problems can't be reproduced here (per the explicit request of kaplan), so i've redacted the original.

read the forum rules, people! read them! ::shakes fist::

[RonPurewal]

by the way, if you can get your hands on the 11th edition of OG, the problem you originally posted (which i had to redact) is basically a carbon copy of #122. it's a sentence about barbara mcclintock and pearls; i'm sure you could find it by poking around the internet for a few seconds.

that problem was purged in the transition from the 11th to the 12th edition, though, so i wouldn't give it too much mind.