Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 20:55 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 20:55

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 346
Own Kudos [?]: 333 [60]
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42103 [9]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 309
Own Kudos [?]: 153 [2]
Given Kudos: 4
Concentration: Strategy, International Business, Finance
Schools:Kellogg Class of 2012
 Q48  V36
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 219
Own Kudos [?]: 1215 [0]
Given Kudos: 86
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Send PM
Re: Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to [#permalink]
I am stuck between A and E.

My thought process was that:

For option A, though it seemed clean, I was not very sure if I can attribute "they" to "athletes". I understand that according to the meaning, "they" has to be referred to "athletes" but I wasn't sure of it.

For option E, I felt there is no ambiguity but I failed to realize that there is no subject "corrected by athletes".

My question is regarding the option A:

Quote:
Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to compensate from an injury, but they ...


In the above sentence, will GMAT consider the pronoun "they" as ambiguous or not?
Because there are a set of books that say that because "they" is the subject in the second clause it has to refer to the subject "athletes" of the first clause.

Is this the right way to think about "they" on the GMAT ??
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 580
Own Kudos [?]: 4324 [2]
Given Kudos: 197
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Send PM
Re: Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to [#permalink]
2
Kudos
gmatter0913 wrote:
I am stuck between A and E.

My thought process was that:

For option A, though it seemed clean, I was not very sure if I can attribute "they" to "athletes". I understand that according to the meaning, "they" has to be referred to "athletes" but I wasn't sure of it.

For option E, I felt there is no ambiguity but I failed to realize that there is no subject "corrected by athletes".

My question is regarding the option A:

Quote:
Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to compensate from an injury, but they ...


In the above sentence, will GMAT consider the pronoun "they" as ambiguous or not?
Because there are a set of books that say that because "they" is the subject in the second clause it has to refer to the subject "athletes" of the first clause.

Is this the right way to think about "they" on the GMAT ??


yes you are right.
see the excerpt from MANHATTAN SC GUIDE:

a) Sometimes (though not always), pronouns show a tendency to refer to nouns in the same case, especially when they are embedded in parallel structures. In particular, a pronoun in subject position in one clause may often be presumed to refer to the subject of a parallel clause, even if that subject is relatively far away.

Supernovas destroy their immediate environments in vast explosions,BUT by synthesizing heavy chemical elements, THEY provide the universe with the possibility of biochemistry-based life as we know it.

Supernovas is the subject of the first clause. The they is also in subject position in the second clause, which is parallel to the first clause. Eventhough there are at least two closer possible antecedents (environments and explosions), we know that they clearly refers to supernovas.

SO basing above and analysing official question you can take this:
If there is and/but/although in a sentence ,then the pronouns refer to first noun or the main subject.
example: Although Mary is younger than Susan ,she is more mature.(she = MARY)
The dog tried to hide under the table ,but it was found.(IT = DOG)

NOTE: this is not claim but no official qusetion i have found which has negated this.

hope this helps.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 219
Own Kudos [?]: 1215 [0]
Given Kudos: 86
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Send PM
Re: Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to [#permalink]
Thanks for the reply blueseas.

Need your help on the below problem.

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.

A. they originally seemed
B. they seemed originally
C. it seemed that they would originally
D. it originally seemed
E. it originally seemed they would <--- OA

I thought there is a rule that all the references of "they" should be to the same precedent?

In option E, I was confused about what is the precedent for "they"? Is it referring to researchers/plastics/"q d" plastics?

I thought option E is ambiguous. The OA explanation doesn't talk about the pronoun ambiguity.
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 580
Own Kudos [?]: 4324 [1]
Given Kudos: 197
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Send PM
Re: Many athletes develop poor fundamentals when trying to [#permalink]
1
Kudos
gmatter0913 wrote:
Thanks for the reply blueseas.

Need your help on the below problem.

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.

A. they originally seemed
B. they seemed originally
C. it seemed that they would originally
D. it originally seemed
E. it originally seemed they would <--- OA

I thought there is a rule that all the references of "they" should be to the same precedent?

In option E, I was confused about what is the precedent for "they"? Is it referring to researchers/plastics/"q d" plastics?

I thought option E is ambiguous. The OA explanation doesn't talk about the pronoun ambiguity.


hi gmatter,

i want add something that:

PRONOUN RULE IS NOT THE ABSOLUTE RULE.(As per RON)
(note: i am not saying about pronun number rule)
always use PRONOUN RULE as the last weapon of your arsenal in order to eliminate any answer choice.

now since in this question meaning wise LAST USE OF THEY should refer to PLASTICS hence the use of they is correct.

please find the attched file for better understanding.

hope it helps
Attachments

Pronoun Ambiguity %28by Ron Purewal%29.docx [423.2 KiB]
Downloaded 340 times

User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 343
Own Kudos [?]: 4586 [0]
Given Kudos: 606
Concentration: Technology, Other
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and
they are finding that
the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.

they (plastic) originally seemed (to take -ellipse) -> but to take is not mentioned in the original sentence
they seemed originally -> Same as A
it seemed that they would originally
>>the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it seemed that they would originally.
it originally seemed -> it pointing to plural plastics
it originally seemed they would (take)
>>the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it originally seemed they would.


C Vs E.
E conveys the meaning more precisely. I don't know how to term the issue in C but the changed position of adverb has made the stmt pretty weird.


Request for inputs from other members.
Regards.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 May 2015
Posts: 60
Own Kudos [?]: 61 [0]
Given Kudos: 28
Send PM
Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
daagh wrote:
This thread revolves around pronoun ambiguity and the placement of the adverb ‘originally’

1. they originally seemed --- The pronoun ‘they appears in two junctures, the first one referring to the researchers, and the second one referring to the plastics ( thereby their disintegration time) . The second one cannot logically refer to researches since it absurd to expect researchers to disintegrate.

2. they seemed originally ---- same problem as in A.

3. it seemed that they would originally ---- ‘It’ holds the place value. But the placement of the adverb is a problem in this choice. It gives a feeling that the plastics originally dissolved quickly, while now they are taking more time. This is wrong perception.

4. it originally seemed--- The adverb placement is ok; but the pronoun it now refers to the plural plastics.

5. it originally seemed they would--- may be this is the solution with it taking its place holder value and the adverb originally modifying the disintegration time and the plural pronoun they modifying the plastics.

What is odd about this thread is that, most of the pointers are more of intuitions and personal perceptions.


daagh - Can you please clarify how in option D 'It' has not taken the placeholder value
also in option E why 'they' is not ambiguous as you have already cross the above 2 answers on the basis of ambiguity
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42103 [2]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
Top Contributor
dushya
Please try to complete each choice and see how the meaning fans out.

Choice 4. It originally seemed what? -- than it originally seemed to take. This means that the plastics are taking more time than people thought they would take. Therefore, 'it' has no relevance in the case. The pronoun 'it' takes a placeholder value when it has no other worthwhile noun to complete the meaning. Placeholder values will be perhaps be the last thing one should look for.

Choice 5. it originally seemed they would-- the completed sentence is -- It originally seemed they( plastics) would take. Here one cannot mix up the plural noun with the Researchers because the researcher does not take time to deteriorate. Here the time taken to deteriorate is the essence of comparison. The choice is followed by a relative clause (that) they would (take), making it clear that they refers to the subject of the nearest clause name the plastics.

On the other hand, B has no such clarity because it has no relative clause that clarifies who is taking more time.

Truly, stylistic differences are too subtle.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2017
Posts: 277
Own Kudos [?]: 252 [0]
Given Kudos: 371
Location: India
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
generis

need your kind help here.
I could not really understand why in option E, "they" can be the correct pronoun with seemed?

Or i am missing something important? "they" can refer back to "plastics", non-human things?

Please help here
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Location: India
Schools: AGSM '23
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I am confused between choice D and E.
I was able to eliminate others as 'it" shall refer to time only.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2014
Posts: 253
Own Kudos [?]: 424 [0]
Given Kudos: 76
Location: Netherlands
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: ISB '21 LBS '22
GPA: 3.9
WE:Analyst (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
The sentence needs clear antecedents for plastics and what seemed to the researchers.
plastics cannot seem something, so A and B are wrong
it seemed is correct. However, in C originally is misplaced.

Only E does it correctly

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.
A. they originally seemed
B. they seemed originally
C. it seemed that they would originally
D. it originally seemed
E. it originally seemed they would
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 16
Location: India
Schools: AGSM '23
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
santorasantu wrote:
The sentence needs clear antecedents for plastics and what seemed to the researchers.
plastics cannot seem something, so A and B are wrong
it seemed is correct. However, in C originally is misplaced.

Only E does it correctly

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.
A. they originally seemed
B. they seemed originally
C. it seemed that they would originally
D. it originally seemed
E. it originally seemed they would


Any reason why option D is wrong ?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2014
Posts: 253
Own Kudos [?]: 424 [1]
Given Kudos: 76
Location: Netherlands
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: ISB '21 LBS '22
GPA: 3.9
WE:Analyst (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Jashan93: D is an imcomplete sentence/ambiguous meaning.
we can complete D in the following ways:

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it originally seemed in few of their studies.
Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it originally seemed for few of the researchers.

so seemed what? is still missing in D.
E basically completes the sentence by telling us that the plastics take more time usually what they are supposed to take.

Hope this helps.
Santora


Jashan93 wrote:
santorasantu wrote:
The sentence needs clear antecedents for plastics and what seemed to the researchers.
plastics cannot seem something, so A and B are wrong
it seemed is correct. However, in C originally is misplaced.

Only E does it correctly

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than they originally seemed.
A. they originally seemed
B. they seemed originally
C. it seemed that they would originally
D. it originally seemed
E. it originally seemed they would


Any reason why option D is wrong ?
Current Student
Joined: 12 Jun 2020
Posts: 105
Own Kudos [?]: 71 [0]
Given Kudos: 147
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 3: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.73
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
I have a doubt with the correct answer E in this case.

E. it originally seemed they would

Since this is an elliptical construction, the sentence should actually read -

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it originally seemed they would (take)

However, the verb "take" is never mentioned in the sentence, so can the ellipsis be correct in this case? I think ellipsis can only replace a verb in a later part of a sentence if the verb is present in the same form in an earlier part. AndrewN GMATNinja is my understanding correct?

Posted from my mobile device
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6857 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
aritrar4 wrote:
I have a doubt with the correct answer E in this case.

E. it originally seemed they would

Since this is an elliptical construction, the sentence should actually read -

Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different rates, and they are finding that the so-called "quick disintegration" plastics are taking more time to deteriorate than it originally seemed they would (take)

However, the verb "take" is never mentioned in the sentence, so can the ellipsis be correct in this case? I think ellipsis can only replace a verb in a later part of a sentence if the verb is present in the same form in an earlier part. AndrewN GMATNinja is my understanding correct?

Posted from my mobile device

I think you are really splitting hairs here, aritrar4. Yes, the sentence would be better written if are taking in (E) were replaced with take. But should we dismiss the answer on such a basis, in light of the other answer choices that we also need to consider? I would say no. As the saying goes, there are bigger fish to fry. I would stick with easier eliminations first (and I would focus on official Verbal questions only).

- Andrew
Manager
Manager
Joined: 19 Jan 2021
Posts: 80
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 226
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.57
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
I am confused between option C & E. can someone please explain it to me ?
Current Student
Joined: 22 Jun 2019
Posts: 44
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 149
Location: India
Schools: LBS '24 (A)
GPA: 4
Send PM
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
Hi Experts generis, AndrewN,

Per my reading, there is no ambiguity in choice D as the time to disintegrate is being compared clearly - what the researchers expected vs. what the expectation turned out to be. Are there any other eliminations for Option D?

Regards,
VIVA
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6857 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
VIVA1060 wrote:
Hi Experts generis, AndrewN,

Per my reading, there is no ambiguity in choice D as the time to disintegrate is being compared clearly - what the researchers expected vs. what the expectation turned out to be. Are there any other eliminations for Option D?

Regards,
VIVA

Hello, VIVA. Although I would agree in that I might say such a sentence as (D) and not think twice about adding the extra words for clarity, we are leaning perhaps too heavily on ellipsis to build the bridge in meaning. That is, the comparison places an emphasis on an action, taking more time, and that part could be left out as an understood element if we saw a word such as expected after the comparison marker, than. But this ellipsis leaves out not just the verb, but the doer of the action, and on the GMAT™, such an overload is not preferable—the meaning may be unclear. To illustrate, if we ignore the adverb and look at the comparison at a barebones level, we get,

plastics are taking more time than it seemed [they would take]

If we reintroduce what was happening to the end of the sentence, we would get,

plastics are taking more time than it seemed [they would take] to deteriorate

But now, look what happens if we remove the "understood" part in brackets:

plastics are taking more time than it seemed to deteriorate

This is the nonsensical meaning that others have pointed out in earlier posts. Seemed to what, exactly? The correct answer clarifies the matter by adding the necessary information.

plastics are taking more time than it seemed they would [take] to deteriorate

An elided verb in such a comparison is fine. The inclusion of it after the comparison simply requires too much to supply on the part of the reader in the more concise option. Again, the truncated version is fine for conversation, but not on the GMAT™.

I hope that helps with your query. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Researchers are studying plastics that dissolve at different [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne