Despite there being no fundamental difference in shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia from the ones in other parts of Northern Europe, archaeological evidence shows that Viking ships were lighter, slimmer, faster, and thus probably more seaworthy than the heavier vessels used by the English at that time.
A. Despite there being no fundamental difference in shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia from the ones
B. Despite no fundamental difference between the shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia from those
C. With shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia not fundamentally different from those
D. With the shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia having no fundamental difference from the ones
E. Although shipbuilding traditions in Viking-Age Scandinavia were not fundamentally different from those

What will be the process to find the correct answer here ? What is wrong with C ?
OA is E.
Source : GMAT Prep

I think this sentence gets little more into Meaning when you come down to C and E.

A,B, and D : out because of wrong idiom : different from / difference between ... and ...

Now if you see:
C: With shipping tradition in V-K...., archaeological evidence shows that ....

It means : both Shipping tradition and evidence are showing something here.
So first of all - Original sentence is not intended to say that and S-Verb agreement issue - Shows( singular)

E: structure is Although X, archaeological evidence shows that...

CONTRAST : statement in Although clause is somewhat opposite to what evidence
shows. This is intended meaning of sentence. So E, is the answer.

^^ this is well explained. nicely done.
the sentence contains two clauses whose meanings are in very clear contrast. therefore, you need a transition word that signals contrast (here, that transition is "although").

--

regarding "with":

when you start a sentence with "With ...", this modifier should modify the subject and/or action of the following clause.

e.g.
with three separate walls around its exterior, the city was nearly impregnable to enemy attacks.
in this case, it's the city that has "three separate walls around its exterior", and this modifier is intimately related to the following clause (it's the reason why the city is impregnable to enemy attacks); hence, this "with" modifier is used correctly.

by the same logic, the original sentence (from the problem) would be implying, absurdly enough, that "archeological evidence" itself HAD "shipbuilding traditions".

thanks

exellent explanation, Ron; However i still have a question.
I often see a clause--S V O-- fallowed by with+NOUN+Pharse , and S do not 'have' the NOUN,but the sentence is correct.
1# is a right sentence from OG ;so if your explanation is generally right, the 2# will be wrong, a sentence changed from the correct one. just need your confirmation!!

1# The diet of the ordinary Greek in classical times was largely vegetarian--vegetables, fresh cheese, oatmeal, and meal cakes, with meat as rarity.
2# with meat as rarity, The diet of the ordinary Greek in classical times was largely vegetarian--vegetables, fresh cheese, oatmeal, and meal cakes.

_________________
stephen

by the way,Ron, i am really a fan of you now.

_________________
stephen

when you start a sentence with "With ...", this modifier should modify the subject and/or action of the following clause.


Thank you Ron very much. It seems there are 3 cases.

Please, give example in which "with..." phrase modify subject of the following clause

example in which "wih..." phrase modify the following clause

example in which "with..."phrase modify the subject and action of following clause.

Thank you Ron,

there's really no difference between "modifying a clause" and "modifying the subject and action of a clause". these are the same notion.
that is, "modifying a clause" means giving more information about the subject and action of that clause; there's really no other way to modify a clause. therefore, the distinction you're trying to make here isn't really a distinction.
the best reason to give multiple interpretations is so that you can go with whichever interpretation you are most comfortable with.

in the choice C and D

"with..." phrase show the simultaeous circimstance which is context of the main clause. For this reason, C and D are wrong.

Is my thinking correct?

Ron, Manhantan experts, pls, help.

Ron, Manhantan expert.

"the ones " in A is correct or not. pls, help me out of this point.

Hi thanghnvn,
Ron actually addressed the issue of "with" up top; I've copied and pasted Ron's explanation here:

regarding "with":

when you start a sentence with "With ...", this modifier should modify the subject and/or action of the following clause.

e.g.
with three separate walls around its exterior, the city was nearly impregnable to enemy attacks.
in this case, it's the city that has "three separate walls around its exterior", and this modifier is intimately related to the following clause (it's the reason why the city is impregnable to enemy attacks); hence, this "with" modifier is used correctly.

by the same logic, the original sentence (from the problem) would be implying, absurdly enough, that "archeological evidence" itself HAD "shipbuilding traditions".

_________________
Jamie Nelson
ManhattanGMAT Instructor

I'm going to say that it's not incorrect, but "those" is generally going to be preferred. Fortunately, you have enough reasons to cross off every answer choice with "the ones" so this doesn't become an issue.

_________________
Jamie Nelson
ManhattanGMAT Instructor

regarding "with":

when you start a sentence with "With ...", this modifier should modify the subject and/or action of the following clause.

e.g.
with three separate walls around its exterior, the city was nearly impregnable to enemy attacks.
in this case, it's the city that has "three separate walls around its exterior", and this modifier is intimately related to the following clause (it's the reason why the city is impregnable to enemy attacks); hence, this "with" modifier is used correctly.

by the same logic, the original sentence (from the problem) would be implying, absurdly enough, that "archeological evidence" itself HAD "shipbuilding traditions".

Thank you Tim, Rons

above sentence show that WITH PHRASE COMMA can modify the following clause and refers to the subject (this means the position of WITH PHRASE must be logic with the subject)

However, the following sentence, from gmatprep, show that WITH PHRASE COMMA can modify the following clause without refering to a subject. The WITH PHRASE dose not refer to the subject.

Because of wireless service costs plummeting in the last year, and as mobile phones are increasingly common, many people now using their mobile phones to make calls across a wide region at night and on weekends, when numerous wireless companies provide unlimited airtime for a relatively small monthly fee.

A. Because of wireless service costs plummeting in the last year, and as mobile phones are increasingly common, many people

B. As the cost of wireless service plummeted in the last year and as mobile phones became increasingly common, many people

C. In the last year, with the cost of wireless service plummeting, and mobile phones have become increasingly common, there are many people

D. With the cost of wireless service plummeting in the last year and mobile phones becoming increasingly common, many people are

E. While the cost of wireless service has plummeted in the last year and mobile phones are increasingly common, many people are


so the takeaway is that WITH PHRASE sometimes dose not refer to any specific noun in the main clause. It dose not neccessarily have to refer to a specific noun though it must alway modify the main clause.

Thank you Ron, Tim, pls, confirm/comment on my idea.

please post a screen shot of the question, with the correct answer indicated..

_________________
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor

//Because of wireless service costs plummeting in the last year, and as mobile phones are increasingly common, many people// now using their mobile phones to make calls across a wide region at night and on weekends, when numerous wireless companies provide unlimited airtime for a relatively small monthly fee.

A. Because of wireless service costs plummeting in the last year, and as mobile phones are increasingly common, many people

B. As the cost of wireless service plummeted in the last year and as mobile phones became increasingly common, many people

C. In the last year, with the cost of wireless service plummeting, and mobile phones have become increasingly common, there are many people

D. With the cost of wireless service plummeting in the last year and mobile phones becoming increasingly common, many people are

E. While the cost of wireless service has plummeted in the last year and mobile phones are increasingly common, many people are

above problem has answer oa D. I do not need to shot the screen because this problem is discussed a lot in this forum already.

The point I want to make and want the experts comment inhere is that "with phrase" can modify the following clause without refering to a specific noun in the main . in most cases, "with phrase" modify the following clause and refers to subject of the following clause. in the above problem, "with the cost...." can not refer to "many people" but the sentence is correct. The point I make is what we learn from a official problem.