Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephon

I am also looking for the explanation of the question asked here - Experts could anyone please help.


" It" in option A refers to the subject "Marconi’s conception" whereas in option C "It" refers to "radio" . Please explain how it is referring to radio in place of the subject of the first independent clause.
A. Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become[/quote][/quote]

Take option C it the following way:

The radio could substitute for the telephone; instead it has become......

Instead of using "the radio", the sentence uses another pronoun "that" that in turn refers to the "radio".

I would suggest that keep pronoun ambiguity as the last resort to eliminate an answer. GMAT has been flexible on this aspect, (especially when the pronoun is the subject of a clause and refers to the subject of another clause in the sentence.... whatsoever this is not exactly such an usage, but could be reformulated in the same line.)

The correct answer is C
In the construction of this sentence, meaning should take the highest priority.
The sentence is trying to the convey - Marconi wanted the radio to become a preferred device for private conversation by replacing telephones but instead radio has become a device for public audience- the opposite of what Marconi wanted it to be.

A. Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
Meaning unclear. Hard to decipher whether it Radio or telephone, which is a tool for private conversation.

B. Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is
Meaning unclear. Hard to decipher whether it Radio or telephone, which is a tool for private conversation.

C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become
Correct Meaning. No ambiguity. The "IT" after the semicolon clearly refers to the radio. so there is no ambiguity in pointing out which device has become tool for public audience.

D. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become
Meaning Wrong:- This sentence blatantly says that Telephone has become a too for public audience.

E. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, [b]other than what it is[/b],
Wrong meaning, unnecessary wordy, All sorts of grammatical problems in this one

Hi,
I'm not an expert,but let me try.

A. Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
-- modifier error : "a tool for private conversation" is supposed to refer to radio

B. Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is
-- same as option A

C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become
-- This is our guy.Meaning is clear."it" refers to radio.

D. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become
-- not sure but i think it's an idiom usage;conceive of something as..;it is the radio,not telephone,that has become a device for public audience.

E. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is
-- not sure but i think it's an idiom usage;conceive of something as..;modifier error : "a tool for private conversation" is supposed to refer to radio

Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.

A. Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
B. Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is
C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become
D. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become
E. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is,

Let's look at this from the modification angle. Marconi conceived radio as a gadget for private talk even when then telephone was existent but was not such a private tool. Hence, the tool for private conversation should always co - exist or stay next to next with radio so that the modification is in order. As per that tenet, only C and D qualify as the genuine contenders
Between C and D, D as a wrong idiom of 'conceived' to be and a wrong antecedence for the pronoun 'which', referring to the telephone.
In C there is no logical dilemma about the antecedence of 'it' since it is the radio that has bee become a mass media tool

Hence C all the way.

Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.
1) Marconi’s conception (subject)………………..was (verb)
2) Phrase “a tool for private conversation” refers to telephone but it actually refers to radio
Marconi conceived of radio as a tool for private conversation but instead it is a tool for communicating with a large audience.
3) It is illogical to say that Marconi’s conception was as a tool……………


A. Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is
Incorrect

B. Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is
Again incorrect placement of the phrase ‘ a tool……….’

C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become
‘that’ when used as a subject of the dependent clause refers to the closes noun but in this (I think) the usage is fine because ‘for private conversation’ cannot be logically placed anywhere else.
So that refers to tool. GMATNinja is this fine according to you?
Use of present perfect ‘has become’ is also fine because it’s still true. Radio is still a tool for private conversation.

Correct choice.

D. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become
Conceived to be is incorrect.
Conceive of someone or something as ………..is correct.

E. Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is,
Incorrect for the reasons stated above.

Nice explanation, Shiv2016!

You're right about the usage of "that" as a noun modifier. The prepositional phrase "for private conversations" also modifies "tool", and it's okay for a noun modifier to “reach behind” a prepositional phrase (see "Usage #4" in this Topic of the Week for more on this).

Agree with the correct answer choice above. However, can someone explain me the use of ; (Semi-Colon) I am getting this wrong every time? I know, we need to use a semi-colon when talking about 2 independent clauses. In the correct sentence here -

C. Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become -- > SV Pair are highlighted as both are independent clause.

What don't I understand is how the second clause can stand alone? What I know from my knowledge that the independent clause can stand alone. Here --> instead, it has become How do we know what are we talking about? to understand the meaning of 'it' we need to backlog the other clause. Right?

I know I am missing something, help me with this.

Hi amitpandey25, you are absolutely correct. However, just for sake of clarity, we need to make a bit of a distinction here:

Two independent clauses can definitely be separated by a semicolon; however, the the presence of a semicolon does not mandate that two independent clauses must be present. In other words, if semicolon adds clarity to parallel parts of a sentence, then semicolon can be used between phrases as well.


Words such as instead, moreover, likewise, and therefore are not subordinating conjunctions. So, basically these words can start an independent clause.

This is often a source of confusion for the candidates and hence, our book Sentence Correction Nirvana makes a special mention of these words and provides few examples. Have attached the corresponding section for your reference.

Hi Expert,
In C, ''it'' has been used for ''Radio''. Here, ''radio'' is the object of preposition ''of''. As far I know, object of the preposition can't be subject anymore in the sentence. If the red part makes sense, why ''it'' has been used as antecedent of ''radio''?
Thanks__

Hi AsadAbu, you might be mixing two things here.

Object of the preposition can't be subject in a given clause. That clause in this sentence is:

Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone

However, we cannot apply this rule across clauses.

In option C, instead, it has become... marks the start of a new Independent clause. So, we cannot apply the prepositional phrase rule in this clause (simply because we don't have the prepositional phrase in this clause; the prepositional phrase was in the previous clause).

The question you perhaps want to ask is:

Can a pronoun (it in this case) refer to an object of a prepositional phrase? The answer is yes. There are numerous such instances in various official examples.

Hi EducationAisle, I'm very happy with your answer. Still, i'm little bit confused for the following official question!
HERE IS THE OFFICIAL QUESTION. OFFICIAL GUIDE 13TH EDITION. QUESTION# 7.



In this question, the official answer is E.

Official Answer in a correct format:
The intricate structure of the compound insect eye, with its hundreds of miniature eyes called ommatidia, helps explain why scientists have assumed that it evolved independently of the vertebrate eye.

In this sentence, the color part ''it'' indicates ''the compound insect eye'' (object of the preposition). So, do you think that ''this sentence consists of at least 2 clause?''

Also, how can someone know/convinced (apart from meaning) that ''it'' does not indicate ''the intricate structure''?

Hi! As I mentioned, the doubts that you have, have nothing to with the following rule:

Object of the preposition can't be subject in a given clause.

The doubts that you have (in your last post as well as in this one), are related to the following question:

Can a pronoun ("it" in this case) refer to an object of a prepositional phrase?

As I mentioned, the answer is yes.

The last question that you posted (Marconi..) and the latest question that you have posted (the intricate structure...), both testify this, since in both cases, the pronoun it in both sentences, is referring to the noun in the prepositional phrase.

Meaning is indeed, the best way to go in SC.

Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.


(A) Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it is

(B) Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is

(C) Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become

(D) Marconi conceived of the radio to be a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become

(E) Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is,


Hi Team,

I thought this was a fairly easy question until I got down to option B and C (official answer). Therefore, I need a more clearer reason to eliminate option B.

Thinking process:

(A) Marconi’s conception of the radio was as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation; instead, it (refers to "Marconi's conception" doesn't make sense) is

(B) Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but which is (doesn't sound right which is not a good reason to eliminate. Therefore, need insight..)

(C) Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become

(D) Marconi conceived of the radio to be (unidomatic "conceived of the X as a.." preferred) a tool for private conversation, a substitute for the telephone, which has become (misplaced modifier should be modifying the radio)

(E) Marconi conceived of the radio to be a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, other than what it is (awkward as whole),

Thank You,
Dablu

This is a tough question so don't beat yourself too bad for getting it wrong :D



Correct - it was not his conception that served as the substitute for the telephone.



Thanks - "sounds right" is a terrible reason. Whenever you are starting at an answer option - always ask yourself what part can you use:

a) Did he conceive it to be a substitute for the telephone? Or did he conceive it to be a tool for private conversation? If you "get" it then you will realize that he did not want to replace telephones but actually it was a tool for private conversation - which could have potentially replaced telephones.

Where is the clue for this? Always look at the non-underlined part for clues

It says that it ended up becoming a tool for communicating with large, public audience. So the first part (to maintain parallelism) has to be "a tool for personal communication".

However, I would rate this as 3/10 in terms of ease of use.

Let me give you another point that could be 9/10 in terms of ease of use.

Look at the word "which" -> what does it refer to? It is unclear. I would use that as an easier way to eliminate B.



Maintains parallelism. And as I have said in the course - please don't worry about the pronoun "it".

I would use that only as a second level of defense (after I am done with the big and juicy rules)



I use idioms only as a tertiary (pronouns as secondary) reason

I would again pick something like the incorrect placement of WHICH to eliminate D



"Awkward and wordy" is a reason only OG explanation writers can use. Mere mortals need to pick a grammatical or a logical reason to explain.

"Other than what it is, precisely the opposite" is REDUNDANT. You say either "other than what it is" or "precisely the opposite"

Secondly, the reason I gave for option B - holds here too. There is a loss of parallelism when we say "as a tool for X instead it has become ..a tool for Y"

Hope this helps,

arun@crackverbal Nice one. Thank You!
I have a question though. In option B, the sentence that starts with, "which....", could we question ourselves whether we need an essential or a non-essential modifier here?
In other words, if we cross off the non-essential modifier in a sentence the sentence should still hold its meaning right?
However, in option B, if we cross off the sentence that starts with "which...", I think the sentence would lose its meaning as we need "precisely the opposite" to contrast. Would this be a good reason to eliminate?

Not to mention, could you reply to my "SC OG 2018 Question no. 772" post.

Thank you!

When we use the construct "but which" - we cannot use the same logic as using a standalone modifier with which.

The word "but" signifies conjunction so we need to have a clause next to it.