<p>In 1850 Jim Beckwourth, a Black American explorer, discovered in the mountains of the Sierra Nevada a pass (c) soon becoming (c) an important gateway to California gold-rush country.</p>
<p>And here is the official explanation:
Explanation for Correct Answer C :<br>
The error in this sentence occurs at (C), where an inappropriate verbal form, the present participle becoming, is inconsistent with the past tense of the main verb, discovered.</p>
<p>I really don't think the explanation is correct. Present participle can certainly be used with past tense, as long as the action modified by the participle doesn't happen before the main verb.
For instance, you can say "Sitting next to Sarah, he felt warm and happy"
Anyone agree or disagree with me? Please explain~~~! Thanks !</p>
<p>Regardless of the grammar, just read the sentence with "becoming" intact - it's just awkward. Now you shouldn't rely on your ear for these types of questions, but the sentence sounds terrible.</p>
<p>Jamesford: It is just too difficult to convince myself on the exam when it just "sounds terrible"...
Thanks for the help, thought. I agree with you. Is there other explanations?</p>
<p>when i did this prob back in the summer, i picked C because my answer is "became", its past tense; however, now i think 'would become', like cb suggested, would be better, because the 'would.. ' past tense thingy,
i was having prob with this too.. but i dont really know</p>
<p>Ren the SAT'er, thanks very much for your reply.
And guys, I know there's certainly a better way to say it. But really, when you would pick it for the right answer, you would need to be convinced that the original wording is WRONG, which indeed was explained by the CB, as posted above; however, I also said why I didn't think the explaination stands because present participle CAN be used in a past-tence sentence. And one more thing: unlike other words, the word "become" kinda indicates a future trend when it's in the "ing" form. So IMP, "soon becoming" is a perfect substitude for a clause with future past tense (would become).
Other thoughts?</p>
<p>@Wavvy
You are right - the CB explanation is not very good. There is a tenses conflict here, but the key word is "soon" which in this sentence refers to future time.
The past tense and the future tense don't usually agree with each other in one sentence.</p>
<p>Examples.</p>
<p>He sat on the beach watching the gentle waves rolling up on shore.
He left the beach because of the swelling waves soon rolling over the pier. (?)
He left the beach because of the swelling waves that would soon roll over the pier.</p>
<p>Not very good sentences, but I hope they give you an idea.</p>
<p>jamesford, that's so not true. both of them are participles = verbal adjective.
gcf101, yes, if you have read my post #6 above, I was also suspecting it was the future past thing. But then isn't is true that "becoming" and "rolling" are essentiallly different because as a linking verb, become, when used with "ing", can be used to indicate a future tense? Other such words include "get", "go", "be", ect. For instance, you may say either "I am getting the book tomorrow," or "I'll get the book tomorrow," while you can't say "I'm rolling over tomorrow" instead of "I'll roll over tomorrow"
But yeah, good observation. If no better explanation can be found, what you've pointed out must be it.</p>