Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth

C is wrong because it has a misplaced modifier "Although observed by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie in the summer of 1898, the discovery of the first identified atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, had not been published before December, 1898"

C suggests that the physicists observed the discovery. Is it? NO. they discovered it

OK thanks. The OA said something about "although" must be followed by a sentence with a subject in it. Is that right?

And what about the time? Why can't we use past perfect?

I was stuck between D and E. Can someone explain why E is incorrect?

The first identified atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, was not published until December, 1898, while it was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie.

I n E, it was not the atom of radium that was not published, it is the discovery. Modifier problem. The use "While" is illogical to show the contrast. While means two events are occuring simultaneously, which is not the case here.

+1 D

E changes the meaning of the sentence. In that option, they tell you that the atom of radium was published. That's wrong!
C also changes the meaning. In that option, they tell you that the discovery was observed. But that's wrong. The atom was observed.

I think I deserve kudos

Right answer-d.
In c use of past perfect make no sense.

Very similar Question from GMAT Prep,

first-pulsar-89791.html?hilit=pulsar#p765827

+1 D. C is incorrect because it uses the wrong tense of "had" suggesting that another action took place prior to another action.

I have modified option D to form 3 more options... Do these seem correct?

The first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified had been observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898

Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898

Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified had been observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898

I know we use Past Perfect when one action occurs before the other. But in this case there are 2 actions that are definitely not parallel (the discovery and the publication). So why not past perfect.

Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, it had not been published until December, 1898

in the above statement , is "Although the first atom of radium" a correct usage?

Strike 1 => Meaning => discovery published not first atom => abe out
Strike 2 => Although sports contradiction but 1898 discovered and published => C out

Here, a basic principle of grammar will see you through than confuse with various other factors like meaning. When you have events that are quite clear about their timelines and sequence, then avoid using past participle, even though one might have happened earlier than the other occurred. For both the events, it is grammatically acceptable to use simple past.

As per this tenet, you can see Choice D and E survive but E does not merit any look since it says that the atom was not published rather than the identification or the discovery. D is the pick.

Hi @Tingle15,
Let’s analyze the three variations that you have presented for Choice D:

1. The first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified had been observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898

ANALYSIS: The usage of past perfect tense is correct here because this sentence is talking about two events and both the events took place in the past. So for sequencing, we past perfect tense has been used.
However, notice that we have clear markers in this sentence that tells us which action took place earlier and
which action took place later. The first atom of radium was observed in the summer of 1898 but the discovery was published only in December 1898. It is clear that summer comes before December. So the sentence clearly says that the atom was observed first and the discovery was published later. So in this case, use of past perfect tense is optional. We can use simple past tense for both the actions.

2. Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898.

ANALYSIS: This sentence is not correct because we cannot use “although” and “but” together is a sentence. Both these words present contrast. Hence we must use any one to express the intended contrast.

3. Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified had been observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898.

ANALYSIS: Again, the use of verb tense is correct here, but use of “but” is not correct.

TAKE AWAY:
1. When we have clear markers to show which event took place earlier and which event took place later, use of past perfect tense becomes optional.
2. Both "although" and "but" cannot be used in a sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi All,

Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, it had not been published until December, 1898.

As usual, let us begin by understanding the meaning of the sentence. The sentence says that physicists Marie and Pierre Curie observed the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth’s metal, in the summer of 1898. But their discovery was published only in December of the same year.

Error Analysis:
1. Pronoun “it” has no antecedent. Logically, the discovery was not published until December 1898. “it” cannot refer to the action of the observation of the atom.
2. The action of publishing took place later. The sentence incorrectly uses past perfect tense for the action that took place later.

POE:

A. Although the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, it had not been published until December, 1898.: Incorrect for the reasons stated above.

B. Although not published until December, 1898, in the summer of 1898 physicists Marie and Pierre Curie observed the first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified.: Incorrect. The opening modifier “Although not published” refer to the subject of the following main clause “physicists Marie and Pierre Curie”. This is incorrect modification.

C. Although observed by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie in the summer of 1898, the discovery of the first identified atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, had not been published before December, 1898. Incorrect.
a. The opening modifier “Although observed” modifies the subject of the following main clause “the discovery”. This is incorrect modification.
b. Past perfect tense has been incorrectly used for later event.

D. The first atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, to be identified was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie, but the discovery was not published until December, 1898: Correct answer.

E. The first identified atom of radium, the heaviest of the earth metals, was not published until December, 1898, while it was observed in the summer of 1898 by physicists Marie and Pierre Curie. Incorrect. This choice distorts the meaning of the sentence in more than one way.
a. Notice that “to be identified” has been changed to “identified”. These two expressions do not have the same meaning. “to be identified” denotes an action that was to be done on the atom while “identified” is an adjective that modifies “atom”.
b. The sentence says that “the first identified atom” was published and not the discovery of the atom. This is incorrect.



1. Past perfect tense is used for earlier events that took in the past.
2. When there are clear markers that say clearly which event took place earlier and which event took place later, use of past perfect tense for the earlier event becomes optional.
3. The modifiers must modify correct entities to communicate the logical meaning.
4. Pronouns must have a clear noun antecedent.
5. Be wary of any change in the structure of a word or words. Such changes alter the meaning of the word.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

generis egmat daagh

if we see the sequence of the events in this sentence, then it is as follows:

|____________________________|_______________|____________
atom was discovered was not published until (by the end of)December 1898
(in summer of 1898)
should not we use "had not been published" instead of "was not published"
To be more clear let us take this example:
By the end of December 1898, the discovery had not been published.-------> doesn't it make sense.
similarly,
Until December 1898, the discovery had not been published.
Because the discovery not being published is the first event and "until December 1898 " is the time marker of ending of December 1898.

Please explain.hazelnut

apovit , in reply to the highlighted question, "No. Because we can draw that time line, we should not use
past perfect. We need past perfect when we cannot draw a time line. Then the past perfect verbs themselves tell us how to draw the time line."

He left the house when the police arrived.
Did he leave the house because the police arrived?
Or did he leave the house at the same time that the police arrived?

He had left the house when the police arrived.
He left before the police came.
Unless we are told otherwise, we do not need to speculate about whether the arrival of the police caused his departure.

In British English, the use of past perfect is very common for recent events.
It is also, according to GMAC, incorrect.

People in the U.S. say: I lost my keys. Would you help me to find them?
People trained in BE say: I have lost my keys. Would you help me to find them?
People trained in BE say: I've lost my keys. Would you help me to find them?

Speakers of BE just have to remember that we use past perfect only if
1) there is one mention of simple past OR a time marker that has the same effect; and
2) there are no sequence words such as before, after, later, etc.

This principle was described by daagh and egmat, above:

If two correct options use different constructions in which option X uses simple past only and option Y uses simple past + past perfect,
the usage of simple past is generally preferred over the usage of past perfect + simple past.

Corollaries:
If only simple past to describe a sequence of events is correct, one of two things must be present:
• a time sequence word such as before, after, previously, subsequently, later, etc.
• time references that are different. The earlier date is clear. If there are more than two dates, the sequence of dates is clear.

Correct: After he heard and spoke in English for a few months, he was comfortable with its pronunciation.
Correct: For a few months beginning in the early summer of 2015, he heard and spoke in English frequently, and by December of that year he was comfortable with its pronunciation.

The actual construction of past perfect, HAD/HAVE + past participle, itself signals sequence.

We do not need verbs to tell us sequence in the sentences above.
-- In the first, we have a sequence word, after.
-- In the second, we have two dates. The earlier one is clear.

Suspect: After he had heard and spoken in English for a few months, he was comfortable with its pronunciation.
Suspect: For a few months beginning in the early summer of 2015 he had heard and spoken in English frequently, and by December of that year he was comfortable with its pronunciation.

Why is this construction suspect?
1) it's redundant. After tells us the sequence in #1. The time frame from June 2015 to December of 2015 tells us the sequence in #2. We do not need the past perfect verb to mark the first event.
2) in addition to redundancy, auxiliary verbs such as had often make what could be a crisp narrative into a slower, more distant narrative.
Another layer of time has been inserted between the events and the reader.

If you can, find another issue with which to eliminate one of the two options.
If you cannot find another issue, choose the option that uses simple past only.


You cannot merely remove the earlier event and analyze the second one in isolation.

had not been published and was not published convey the same logical fact.
But we do not need "had not been." We already have sequence.
We know that the summer of 1898 is earlier than December 1898.

Event #1: The Curies observe/discover radium in the summer of 1898
Event #2: News of the discovery was published in December 1898, a few months after the discovery

Option D uses

Radium was [first] observed [SIMPLE PAST] in the summer of 1898 by the Curies, but their discovery was not published[SIMPLE PAST] until December, 1898.

• Try the active voice

Maybe if I rewrite this sentence in active voice the issue will become clearer.
(This passive voice construction is one way that GMAC traps people into thinking that past perfect is necessary.)

Correct: The Curies discovered radium in the summer of 1898, but they did not publish news of its discovery until December 1898.
Suspect: The Curies had discovered radium in the summer of 1898, but they did not publish news of its discovery until December 1898.

Every single day between summer of 1898 and December of 1898, the Curies did not publish the discovery. Every single day, the discovery was not published.

Suspect: Why would we use more words to say the same thing?
Why would we risk redundancy?
Why would we use verbs whose main purpose is to rescue sentences that do NOT have sequence built into them?

Answer: I have no idea. We do not need to do so.

I suspect that British English has something to do with your logic.

All aspirants who speak or were trained in British English need to train themselves into the habit of seeing whether simple past will work.

I hope that helps.