dcoolguy wrote:
dcoolguy wrote:
hello experts,
AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrepSince 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?
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.
dcoolguy wrote:
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.
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 am no longer contributing to GMAT Club. Please request an active Expert or a peer review if you have questions.