Genetic engineers may use cloning techniques to develop more productiv

Genetic engineers may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants despite that they may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested.


A. Genetic engineers may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants despite that they may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested. -- "despite that" is wrong conjunction in this context

B. Although they may use cloning techniques to produce more productive and disease-resistant plants, the race of cloned human beings suggested by some science-fiction writers may never be created by genetic engineers. -- "they" is wrongly modifying "the race of cloned human beings"

C. Although some science-fiction writers have suggested a race of cloned human beings that genetic engineers may never create, they may use cloning techniques to produce more productive and disease-resistant plants. -- "they" could refer to either sci-fi writers or genetic engineers (as rule will refer to the subject of the IC, i.e., sci-fi writers -- wrong)

D. Even though genetic engineers may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested, they may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants. -- CORRECT, the issue in C is fixed by making genetic engineers the subject noun

E. More productive and disease-resistant plants may be produced by genetic engineers using cloning techniques even though they may never create the race of cloned humans that some science-fiction writers have suggested. -- Passive construct, wordy

So, the answer is D

daagh. how does they correctly refer back to engineers in D but not in C?

kriti

Did you see the concept, which I have stated at the beginning of the reply? That should make things clear to you.

I had missed that daagh. thanks for the response.

In (D), it starts with a dependent clause connected by "that" with another dependent clause. Later after comma, it starts an independent clause, which starts with "they", so should refer back to the subject of the first clause or the second clause?

Here's the official explanation provided by the GMAC for this question:

The sentence addresses the scope and limitations of cloning techniques. These techniques, we are told, can improve agricultural plants, but it is conceded that, contrary to what science-fiction writers have imagined, such techniques may never be successfully used to create a new strain of humans. The main flaw in the given sentence is the use of the unidiomatic despite that, where although or even though would better express the intended concession.

Option A: As explained, this version fails because of the use of despite that. Despite normally functions as a preposition governing a pronoun, noun, or noun phrase rather than a noun clause introduced by that. Treating despite that as a conjunction that can function like although and introduce a clause is not generally accepted as grammatically correct.

Option B: The forward-reference of the pronoun they is not sufficiently clear; there is a natural tendency to read it initially as referring to cloned human beings, even though that makes little sense in the context of the sentence as a whole.

Option C: The pronoun they is naturally taken as referring to science-fiction writers, but that reference makes little sense in the context of the sentence as a whole; it is unlikely that the intended thought is that science fiction writers would use cloning techniques. The relative clause that … create is a modifier of a race … human beings, but because the entire phrase (noun phrase plus the modifying relative clause) conveys what some fiction writers suggest, the noun phrase cloned human beings that genetic engineers may never create is incoherent (cloned by definition entails being genetically engineered).

Option D: Correct. The pronoun they clearly refers back to genetic engineers. The words even though correctly introduces a clause used to concede something.

Option E: The use of the passive verb form may be produced is unnecessarily convoluted and provides no improvement on the given sentence. The fact that they is preceded by several plurals tends to confuse the issue of which plural noun it refers to. Even if context suggests that it refers to genetic engineers, grammatically it should refer back to the subject of the main clause (more productive and disease-resistant plants).<a name="_GoBack"></a>

The correct answer is D.

Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.

Does anyone have examples in which the word "despite" has been used correctly vs. incorrectly?

I have noted from the official explanation that "despite" normally functions as a preposition governing a pronoun, noun, or noun phrase rather than a noun clause introduced by that

I would greatly appreciate any examples you may be able to provide. Thanks!

Genetic engineers may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants despite that they may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested.


A. Genetic engineers may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants despite that they may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested.

-- 'despite that' is not correct.

B. Although they may use cloning techniques to produce more productive and disease-resistant plants, the race of cloned human beings suggested by some science-fiction writers may never be created by genetic engineers.

-- 'the race of cloned human beings' may use cloning techniques?

C. Although some science-fiction writers have suggested a race of cloned human beings that genetic engineers may never create, they may use cloning techniques to produce more productive and disease-resistant plants.

-- 'they' refers to science fiction writers, which is non-sensical.

D. Even though genetic engineers may never create the race of cloned human beings that some science-fiction writers have suggested, they may use cloning techniques to develop more productive and disease-resistant plants.

-- Looks good. Keep.

E. More productive and disease-resistant plants may be produced by genetic engineers using cloning techniques even though they may never create the race of cloned humans that some science-fiction writers have suggested.

-- Not sure if 'they' refers to genetic engineers or cloning techniques.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.