# Lesson: Exceptions to the Touch Rule

## Comment on Exceptions to the Touch Rule

### Thank you for all your great

Thank you for all your great videos and other resources!

Would you consider linking verbs also an exception to the touch rule. Since it is, "Joe feels bad" and the word "bad" is modifying "Joe" but not touching it? Or do I make a mistake here?

### That's a great (and valid)

That's a great (and valid) point! Thanks for that.

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

https://gmatclub.com/forum/to-map-earth-s-interior-geologists-use-a-network-of-seismometers-to-206347.html

Could you explain why C is the correct choice and E is incorrect one.

How do I know whether the present participle clause "traveling..." modifies waves and not interior, or crust, or even geologist.

In E this is solved by parallelism with that

waves that originate ...
waves that travel ...

What do you think?

The main problem with E is that we use the adjective SLOWER to modify the verb TRAVEL.
It should be: "...TRAVEL RAPIDLY through dense regions and SLOWLY through hotter rocks.

C) ... geologists use a network to chart waves that do X and Y, traveling most rapidly through cold, dense regions and more slowly through hotter rocks.

So, the participial phrase "traveling most rapidly through cold..." modifies WAVES.

Cheers,
Brent

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-19-year-old-pianist-and-composer-performed-his-most-recent-work-al-206348.html

I thought that this present participle must immediately be preceded by the noun it modifies "...winning prestigious awards in both London and Tokyo for his" which in this case is "The 19-year-old pianist and composer",

I picked E, do you know why it is incorrect?

We need BOTH X AND Y
And X and Y must be parallel

A. in BOTH London AS WELL AS Tokyo ... (we need BOTH X AND Y)
B. BOTH in London and Tokyo ... IN LONDON and TOKYO are not parallel
C. BOTH in London AND Tokyo...IN LONDON and TOKYO are not parallel
D. in BOTH London ADD Tokyo...LONDON and TOKYO are parallel (keep)
E. BOTH in London AS WELL AS Tokyo...(we need BOTH X AND Y)

Aside: Another correct structure is "both IN LONDON and IN TOKYO

Cheers,
Brent

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

I understand now why D is the best answer in terms of "BOTH" structure, but just as an aside,

What "winning prestigious awards" modifies. What is the rule I have to learn about present participle to not confuse myself because I know from your videos that present participle modifies nouns, but how to know whether it is ambiguous or not?

### The format of this sentence

The format of this sentence goes something like this:

The SUBJECT did some stuff, RESULTING in something else happening.

We have: The PIANIST performed his most recent work, WINNING prestigious awards ...

Ok, thank you,

I understand,

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

COuld you please explain why A and B are wrong and why C is correct:

Despite recent increases in sales and cash flow that have propelled automobile companies’ common stocks to new highs, several industry analysts expect automakers, in order to conserve cash, to set dividends more conservatively than they were.

(A) to set dividends more conservatively than they were

(B) to set dividends more conservatively than they have been

(C) to be more conservative than they have been in setting dividends

(D) that they will be more conservative than they were in setting dividends

(E) that they will be more conservative than they have been to set dividends

The main issue here is that the pronoun THEY (in "more conservatively than THEY were") is ambiguous.
THEY could stand for analysts, automakers, or even dividends.
For this reason we can eliminate A and B.

The context of the sentence tells us that the AUTOMAKERS are the ones should set dividends more conservatively.

(C).... analysts expect AUTOMAKERS (some fluff to ignore) to be more conservative than THEY have been in setting dividends.
This sentence removes the ambiguity. Keep for now

(D).... analysts expect AUTOMAKERS that they will be more conservative than they were in setting dividends
"AUTOMAKERS that they" is nonsensical.
Eliminate D

(E).... analysts expect AUTOMAKERS that they will be more conservative than they have been to set dividends
"AUTOMAKERS that they" is nonsensical.
Eliminate E

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

Thank you so much,

Good one,

### Hi Brent,

Hi Brent,

Could you please explain why B is incorrect and C is correct?

Just like the background in art history need by an archaeologist in order to evaluate finds of ancient art, the nautical archaeologist needs specialized knowledge of the history of ship design in order to understand shipwrecks.

(A) Just like the background in art history needed by an archaeologist in order to evaluate finds of ancient art, the

(B) Just as an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art, a

(C) Just as an archaeologist needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art, so a

(D) Like the archaeologist who evaluates finds of ancient art and requires a background in art history, so the

(E) As evaluating finds of ancient art requires an archaeologist who has the background in art history, so the

Can we make B a correct optionw if we replace "as" with like"

Just LIKE an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art, a nautical archaeologist needs specialized knowledge of the history of ship design in order to understand shipwrecks.

There are two issues with answers choice B.
First, the idiom is JUST AS X, SO Y. Answer choice B does not have this construction.

Second, the relative pronoun WHO limits the discussion to only those archaeologists who need a background in art history. This is not the intent of the sentence. The intent is to say that archaeologists and nautical archaeologists are similar in that they both need specialized knowledge.

Here's an example of what I mean: Just as doctors enjoy saving lives, so misers enjoy saving money.
Here we are comparing the ways in which doctors and misers enjoy saving things.

Now let's see what happens if we rewrite the sentence as follows: Just as doctors WHO enjoy saving lives, so misers enjoy saving money.
How we are comparing a SUBSET of doctors (those doctors who enjoy sitting lives) with misers.
This changes the intended meaning of the sentence.

Answer choice (C) correctly uses the idiom JUST AS X, SO Y.
Answer choice C also does not limit the comparison to just those archaeologists who need a background in art history.

Does that help?