Floating in the waters of the equatorial Pacific, an array of buoys co

Yup, the distortion in meaning in (C) is the best way to eliminate it. If the author intends to say that the "interactions" affect global climate and (C) tells us that something completely different affects the global climate, then that is a pretty solid reason to eliminate the answer choice.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Hi GMATNinja

I have question regarding this OG example,
Floating in the waters of the equatorial Pacific, an array of buoys collects and transmits data on long-term interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere, interactions that affect global climate.

Is it safe to eliminate these choices just because they have "that" and its against the touch rule?
(C) atmosphere that affects
(D) atmosphere that is affecting

IMO ı am not sure because in one of your SC videos you mentioned that as long as the meaning serves "that" can safely touch the noun before the prepositions,
in our case we may say interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere that affect .... (so "that" can touch the noun interactions

also can we say the same for "which" or would it be any different than "that" in terms of harsh touch rule?

thank you for reply

Public service announcement: there's really no such thing as the touch rule! When you're evaluating a relative pronoun such as "that" or "which" you're only asking yourself whether there's a nearby noun it could logically describe. That's it.

(C) and (D) are wrong because there's no noun "that" could logically refer to. In each case, "that" is paired with a singular verb. But it's not the "atmosphere" or the "ocean" alone impacting climate change, it's the interactions between them.

In (A), "that" is paired with the plural verb "affect," and the plural noun "interactions" is right there. So while "that" doesn't have to touch what it describes, it's nice when it does, as we now know it's not a concrete error.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Hi, GMATNinja! I have a generic doubt regarding this OG question.

What if option C had 'those affecting' instead of 'that affects', would usage be correct?

Hello mainbhiankit,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your query, we believe that we can help resolve your doubt.

The use of "those affecting" would not make Option C correct, as the sentence formed by such an answer choice would refer to information that is permanent in nature with the present participle ("verb+ing" - "affecting" in this case); please remember, information that i permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

GMATNinja , hello !
Just a short question - > isn't 'interactions that affect global climate.' an appositive rather than an absolute phrase ?
would appreciate it if you could clarify the doubt!

This would make it awfully hard for the reader to determine what "those" is referring to. Is it "ocean + atmosphere"? Is it "interactions"? Maybe "buoys"?

(A) avoids this problem altogether by repeating "interactions" before the noun modifier describing it ("that affect..."). So even if you make that change (in spite of the flaws mentioned by @ExpertsGlobal5), (A) is still the clearer and better option.
_________________

Oof, those are some scary grammar words!

Luckily the GMAT will never ask us to label parts of a sentence, so let's start with a better question: what does "interactions that affect global climate" describe? Hopefully it's fairly obvious that this part of the sentence gives us more information about the "interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere".

So, if you know what "interactions that affect global climate" describes, does it really matter what we call it? Not at all for this exam.
_________________

I eliminated the options using ''AFFECTING'' by logic that the fact should always be presented in the SIMPLE PRESENT TENSE. As Interactions between the EARTH & ATMOSPHERE is a fact, it has to be presented in simple past, is this logic correct?

Hello VIGHNESHKAMATH,

We hope this finds you well.

We are pleased to inform you that your logic in eliminating these answer choices is perfectly correct. Statements of fact, habitual actions, and any information that is permanent in nature are best conveyed through the simple present tense.

Kudos.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

It cannot be C because of the restrictive modifier "that"...

If we use a restrictive modifier here we would illogically be reducing the scope of what data collections we would be collecting to those that affect global climate

The simple present definitely makes a lot of sense here, but does that mean that "interactions affecting" would definitely be wrong in this context?

Well, the good news is that we aren't asked to choose between "interactions that affect" and "interactions affecting". Instead, we are asked to choose between "interactions that affect" and "WITH interactions affecting". And as described in this post and in this follow-up, the phrase "with interactions..." doesn't really work here.

So even though the simple present is probably better in this case, I certainly wouldn't recommend inventing a rule stating that we MUST use the simple present whenever talking about a fact. And even if that were a rule, it would be highly subjective and difficult to reliably apply.

It would be nice if SC was about compiling, memorizing, and applying a straightforward list of grammar rules, but that's not the case. Few, if any, grammar rules universally apply on the GMAT, and you'll need to think about logic and meaning on nearly every official SC question.

I hope that helps!
_________________

this is great explanation on the core point.
in choice B, if we add "the" before "interactions", the meaning of choice B could be better. without "the", the second 'interactions" become unclear. which interactions?

hello experts, AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep

Since there is no such thing called intended meaning.
I am stuck between A and C!
Since I've never heard interection between ocean and atmosphere can effect climate.
I was inclined to choice C, maybe somehow atmosphere alone affetcs global climate.
Its not illogical.
Why C is wrong?

Hello dcoolguy,

We hope this finds you well.

To provide a bit of help with your doubt, our approach to meaning in SC questions is to take the meaning conveyed by A as the presumptive intended meaning of the sentence. You should discard the meaning conveyed by Option A only under two circumstances:

1. The meaning is incoherent or entirely illogical.

2. The only grammatically correct answer choice conveys a different meaning.

Thus, since the meaning conveyed by Option A is logical and coherent and Option A is, itself, grammatically correct, we can say that Option C is incorrect because it alters the intended meaning of the sentence.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep AndrewN GMATNinja
I Would like to know your thoughts on this one.
As I remember from one of my earlier query, Marty and Ajitesh do not agree with intended meaning approach.
Please have a look!

Hello, dcoolguy. I prefer a blank slate approach, in which I go into reading a sentence as objectively as I can, without assuming anything about intentions. This is not to say that the prudent approach outlined above by ExpertsGlobal5 is wayward, just that two different people can approach the same task in different ways.

Regarding the question at hand, you have to weigh the body of evidence that all five answer choices provide together to make an informed decision on what you think the sentence aims to convey, and on which iteration is the best of those five. Answer choices (A) and (B) clearly focus more on interactions than do (C) through (E). But one aspect of (C) and (D) that catches my eye is that there is no compelling case that can be made for one or the other if the intended meaning is to comment solely on the atmosphere affecting the global climate. Consider:

1) The atmosphere affects global climate.
2) The atmosphere is affecting global climate.

Both sentences present a factual statement. The second just conjugates the verb differently to convey an ongoing action. If you want to argue that 1) is more concise and should be favored, I would say that you have missed the point of placing stock in conciseness. You choose a more concise option when a lengthier one adds nothing in the way of clarity, but you should not penalize a verb tense because it utilizes a helping verb. If both verb forms can operate within the same shell of a sentence, and nothing else separates the two, then you have to treat them as equally valid.

Furthermore, your query itself touches on a doubt in your interpretation.


Sure, perhaps the atmosphere alone could affect the global climate, but what if it does not, and the sentence only makes it sound that way because of a modifier? Why does the original sentence go out of its way to clearly identify the interactions that affect the global climate? Answer choice (C) is in a tight spot. If something could be true, we cannot say it must be true.

In short, I can see a few reasons to doubt answer choice (C), one based on interpretation, the other on the lack of a real difference between what it says and what another answer choice says. Your goal in SC should be to play it safe, not to chase could-be-true options and seek ways to justify them.

Thank you for thinking to bring me into the dialogue.

- Andrew
_________________

I'm not sure that I can improve at all on the post from AndrewN, but I'll add my two cents anyway, just in case that helps at all.

In (C), we have, "...interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere that affects global climate." Since the "that" clause modifies "the atmosphere" here, it makes it sound as though there are multiple atmospheres to choose from:

(1) the specific atmosphere that affects global climate
(2) all of the other atmospheres that do NOT affect global climate

Since the planet only has one atmosphere, that wouldn't make any sense.

Who knows what exactly those interactions are in choice (A), but it's not hard to imagine how those interactions might affect global climate -- maybe it has something to do with the amount of water transferred between the two... or something.

In any case, it sounds like you aren't quite clear on how the atmosphere affects global climate change either ("maybe somehow atmosphere alone affects global climate"), so you can't really use that as a decision point.

More broadly, I don't think it's useful to worry about INTENDED meaning on the GMAT. The exam can't ask us to read its mind, and we can't really know what it "intends". Instead, all we can do is look for the answer choice that does the best job of conveying a reasonable, logical meaning. And in this question, (C) doesn't do a great job of that.

I hope that helps a bit!
_________________

Thank you for the kind words, GMATNinja. The dual interpretation that you pointed out in the relative clause reminds me of what I enjoy about the forum: different people can take the same grammatical pieces and find unique and interesting ways to discuss them. If we all wanted to posture and demonstrate how talented we were while peddling the OA, the forum would get stale rather quickly, I think. Your post is another fine addition to this discussion. I look forward to the next time our paths may cross (even if it is tomorrow, since we seem to be bumping into each other more frequently).

- Andrew
_________________