|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 23 Jul 2011
Posts: 201
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V34
GPA: 2.99
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
23
[0], given: 66
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a [#permalink]
08 Feb 2012, 14:23
Question Stats:
59% (02:06) correct
40% (01:11) wrong based on 8 sessions
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. (A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, (B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton induced x-ray emission (C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, (D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it, (E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton-induced x-ray emission, Why and how is the OA correct. Why is the use of "which" correct in Answer A, but not C/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2011
Posts: 283
Schools: Booth,NUS,St.Gallon
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
27
[0], given: 45
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
09 Feb 2012, 00:06
(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, (C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, Let us analyse these two sentences closely.Which is used to give in some additional information and non restrictive in nature .Remove the underlined portion and insert the remaining sentence into the original sentence . When you do this only sentence a makes sense .Hope i make sense let me know if you are still not clear .
_________________
+1 if you like my explanation .Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 400
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
37
[1] , given: 13
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
09 Feb 2012, 00:12
1
This post received KUDOS
(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
CORRECT
(B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton induced x-ray emission
The modifier starting with originally is too far from technique. so wrong
(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
Why do you need a comma after pollutants? The initial modifer starting with A technique seems to modify called. wrong
(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,
which has the ability is wordy
(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton-induced x-ray emission,
has the ability ?? parallelism problem as well after AND. So, wrong
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2011
Posts: 119
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 17
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
03 Jul 2012, 04:18
I could get onto the correct choice based on various other routes but I still dont know how can we ascertain antecedent of "it".
Can some explain, based on the concepts of subject/object?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 158
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 12
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
03 Jul 2012, 08:23
pavanpuneet wrote: I could get onto the correct choice based on various other routes but I still dont know how can we ascertain antecedent of "it".
Can some explain, based on the concepts of subject/object? Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. It is sort of confusing, but to me it looks like the "it" refers to "substance." It can't refer to the other nouns "air pollutants" or "chemical elements" because they are plural. That leaves the last noun "technique," but I don't think you can logically destroy a technique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1083
Followers: 509
Kudos [?]:
1053
[0], given: 131
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
03 Jul 2012, 09:19
pavanpuneet wrote: I could get onto the correct choice based on various other routes but I still dont know how can we ascertain antecedent of "it".
Can some explain, based on the concepts of subject/object? Hi there, Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. A pronoun must not only have an antecedent but also have a logical antecedent. According to this sentence, the proton-induced x-ray emission technique can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it. From meaning standpoint, this particular technique can analyze chemical elements in almost any substance and does not even destroy it. So where does it do the function of analyzing? In any almost any substance. So it does that function without destroying the substance. Now, it is true that “chemical elements” does not agree in number with “it” and hence that cannot be the antecedent for “it”. Another singular entity is “technique” but it will make no sense to say that technique is used to so something without destroying the technique. Hence, there is no problem with the reference of “it” in this sentence. At e-gmat we cover in detail about grammatical antecedent and logical antecedent of pronouns in our concept called Pronouns.Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha
_________________
Free trial:Click here to start free trial (100+ free practice questions) Free Session (May 25): : Learn how to master Sentence Correction. Click here to attend.
  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 456
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 39
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
04 Jul 2012, 20:19
In C and D, "developed" is parallel to " called" , so we need "and" to connect them.
There is no "and" so, C and D are wrong. please, confirm/comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1083
Followers: 509
Kudos [?]:
1053
[0], given: 131
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
05 Jul 2012, 06:48
thangvietnam wrote: In C and D, "developed" is parallel to " called" , so we need "and" to connect them.
There is no "and" so, C and D are wrong. please, confirm/comment. Hi there, Yes, you are correct in saying that “developed” and “called” are parallel in the sense that both are verb-ed modifiers that modifies “a technique”. Now, the usage of “called” or “named” is little different from other verb-ed modifiers. “Called” and “named” must be placed immediately after the entities they modify. They cannot be placed far away as seen in Choices C and D. So yes, in a way we can say that placing only “and” without preceded by comma before “called” can solve this modification error. But, this will make the choices wordy. In choice A, both these modifiers are placed perfectly. Also, there are “which” modification error in choice C and D. These also make choices C and D incorrect. Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha
_________________
Free trial:Click here to start free trial (100+ free practice questions) Free Session (May 25): : Learn how to master Sentence Correction. Click here to attend.
  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 212
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 11
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
05 Jul 2012, 14:31
egmat wrote: pavanpuneet wrote: I could get onto the correct choice based on various other routes but I still dont know how can we ascertain antecedent of "it".
Can some explain, based on the concepts of subject/object? Hi there, Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. A pronoun must not only have an antecedent but also have a logical antecedent. According to this sentence, the proton-induced x-ray emission technique can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it. From meaning standpoint, this particular technique can analyze chemical elements in almost any substance and does not even destroy it. So where does it do the function of analyzing? In any almost any substance. So it does that function without destroying the substance. Now, it is true that “chemical elements” does not agree in number with “it” and hence that cannot be the antecedent for “it”. Another singular entity is “technique” but it will make no sense to say that technique is used to so something without destroying the technique. Hence, there is no problem with the reference of “it” in this sentence. At e-gmat we cover in detail about grammatical antecedent and logical antecedent of pronouns in our concept called Pronouns.Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha agreed that it refers to substance, but then what is wrong with C or D, is it because it has 2 verbs ??? (C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. Main clause A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. Subject: A technique verb1: originally developed verb2: is finding 2verbs ???? subordinate clause which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, subject: which verb: can quickly analyze (D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. Main clause A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. Subject: A technique verb1: originally developed verb2: is finding 2verbs ???? subordinate clause which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it, subject: which verb: has
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 37
GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V31
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
05 Jul 2012, 19:46
saikarthikreddy wrote: (A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
Let us analyse these two sentences closely.Which is used to give in some additional information and non restrictive in nature .Remove the underlined portion and insert the remaining sentence into the original sentence .
When you do this only sentence a makes sense .Hope i make sense let me know if you are still not clear . I'm not sure if I understand still...I don't really see anything wrong with removing the underlined part of C and inserting the rest into the original sentence. Can you explain please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1083
Followers: 509
Kudos [?]:
1053
[2] , given: 131
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
06 Jul 2012, 07:08
2
This post received KUDOS
kuttingchai wrote: agreed that it refers to substance, but then what is wrong with C or D, is it because it has 2 verbs ???
Hi there, Let us split choice C into clauses: A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. • A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, o which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, • (Cont. of Cl. 1) is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. “developed” is not a verb here. It’s a verb-ed modifier. The only verb that clause 1 has is “is finding”. (Click on the following link to learn how to distinguish between a past tense verb and verb-ed modifier: ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html#p1100855) In choice C, “called proton-induced x-ray emission” has been separated from the entity it should modify – “a technique”. As a result, relative pronoun “which” is now only modifying the preceding noun “proton-induced x-ray emission”. It is not modifying “a technique” anymore. This leads to the modification error in Choice C. Same is the case with Choice D as well. Now let’s take a look at the correct Choice A:Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. In this sentence, the opening modifier “developed” is correctly modifying the subject of the preceding clause “a technique”. Now another modifier “called…” is placed just after “a technique”. So here the sentence is really saying: a technique = proton-induced X-ray emission“a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission” makes one big noun phrase here and hence, “which” correctly modifies this entire noun phrase, including “a technique”. Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha
_________________
Free trial:Click here to start free trial (100+ free practice questions) Free Session (May 25): : Learn how to master Sentence Correction. Click here to attend.
  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 01 Jan 2012
Posts: 34
GMAT 1: Q42 V32 GMAT 2: 0 Q50 V35
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 5
|
Re: Originally Developed [#permalink]
25 Jul 2012, 11:08
egmat wrote: kuttingchai wrote: agreed that it refers to substance, but then what is wrong with C or D, is it because it has 2 verbs ???
Hi there, Let us split choice C into clauses: A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. • A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, o which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, • (Cont. of Cl. 1) is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. “developed” is not a verb here. It’s a verb-ed modifier. The only verb that clause 1 has is “is finding”. (Click on the following link to learn how to distinguish between a past tense verb and verb-ed modifier: ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html#p1100855) In choice C, “called proton-induced x-ray emission” has been separated from the entity it should modify – “a technique”. As a result, relative pronoun “which” is now only modifying the preceding noun “proton-induced x-ray emission”. It is not modifying “a technique” anymore. This leads to the modification error in Choice C. Same is the case with Choice D as well. Now let’s take a look at the correct Choice A:Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology. In this sentence, the opening modifier “developed” is correctly modifying the subject of the preceding clause “a technique”. Now another modifier “called…” is placed just after “a technique”. So here the sentence is really saying: a technique = proton-induced X-ray emission“a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission” makes one big noun phrase here and hence, “which” correctly modifies this entire noun phrase, including “a technique”. Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha Hi Shraddha, I have read somewhere that "which" can not modify entire clause. It modifies the noun preceding it. How will you explain it? Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Status: employeed
Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 42
Schools: Big 12
WE 1: 5 years - Software Engineer
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
8
[1] , given: 1
|
Re: Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a [#permalink]
23 Nov 2012, 08:39
1
This post received KUDOS
In Shraddha's example, which modifies a noun phrase. A noun phrase is not the same as a clause because a noun phrase acts as the subject of a sentence and thus requires a verb following it.
“a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission” - Not a sentence
“a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission is very useful” - A sentence
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 21 Oct 2012
Posts: 14
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
26
[2] , given: 16
|
Re: Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a [#permalink]
24 Nov 2012, 06:06
2
This post received KUDOS
gmatpunjabi wrote: Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.
(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton induced x-ray emission
(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,
(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton-induced x-ray emission,
Why and how is the OA correct. Why is the use of "which" correct in Answer A, but not C/ To come out of the confusion of placing 'a technique' lets analyze the two options : The first clause is modifier of the second clause and modifies correctly. (A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique When we change the position of 'a technique' we need to remove the ',' before called, else the sentence has a modifier error, relative pronoun which here will refer to emission. (C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, So the correct option is A (this question is there in OG as well)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 456
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 39
|
Re: Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a [#permalink]
06 Jan 2013, 07:45
"which can modify the slightly far noun if the prepositional phrase folloing the noun modifies that noun. However, this construction is consider inferior and so, an error if there is better choice . consider the following, the question 48 og 13It is called a sea, but the landlocked Caspian is actually the largest lake on Earthf whichcovers more than four times the surface area of its closest rival in size, North America's Lake Superior. (A) It is called a sea, but the landlocked Caspian is actually the largest lake on Earth, which covers (B) Although it is called a sea, actually the landlocked Caspian is the largest lake on Earth, which covers (C) Though called a sea, the landlocked Caspian is actually the largest lake on Earth, covering (D) Though called a sea but it actually is the largest lake on Earth, the landlocked Caspian covers (E) Despite being called a sea, the largest lake on Earth is actually the landlocked Caspian, covering is my thinking correct ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
[#permalink]
06 Jan 2013, 07:45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar topics |
Author |
Replies |
Last post |
|
Similar Topics:
|
|
|
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
|
mbamantra |
5 |
25 Apr 2004, 07:41 |
|
|
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
|
HongHu |
7 |
30 Jan 2005, 22:29 |
|
|
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
|
swath20 |
9 |
31 Mar 2005, 12:01 |
|
|
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
|
rahulraao |
7 |
14 Nov 2005, 23:37 |
|
|
|
Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a
|
vivek123 |
8 |
01 Jul 2006, 00:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, Marcab, Narenn, GetThisDone
|