purnima wrote:
Curly05 wrote:
His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine home land, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age
in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas.
(A) in which great ice sheets had existed in now currently temperate areas
(B) in which great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas
(C) when great ice sheets existed where there were areas now temperate
(D) when great ice sheets had existed in current temperate areas
(E) when great ice sheets existed in areas now that are temperate
It's either B or E. Is it due to idioms( in which vs. when) or since the age is in the past; it is unlikely that the great ice sheets existed in areas now. I know diction is important on GMAT. In ( now) temperate areas , does now function as an adjective?
Victor
I have doubt regarding tense usage in the question.
My meaning analysis of the sentence is :-
1.Studies conducted by Louis in his homeland led him to propose in 1837 a concept of an age .
2.In this age great ice sheets existed in area that are now temperate area.
POE done in original sentence:-
1. I don't see error in tense usage , but due to redundancy now / currently.Option A is wrong.
How do I work on the tense and see no error:
1. As per my understanding of
egmat course on tense :
-On the timeline , studies are done in the past , in 1837 ( past time ) Louis proposes the concept of an age.
- In this age ice sheets existed in areas.
Usage of past perfect tense as per me is Ok because :-
1. That age has now ceased to exist . so if we use simple past existed it would not convey the meaning.
1. Also I want clarity on the usage of ín which 'and 'when'
My current understanding is : Use 'When 'to refer time /time period.
Expert opinion would be great on each answer choice.
Dear Purnima,
Thank you for your query.
Now as mentioned by Shraddha in her post, the use of the Past Perfect Tense is not appropriate in choice A.
As pointed out by Shraddha as well, we use the past perfect tense to establish or emphasize sequencing, that is to show which event took place earlier and which took place later. And mind you, these two events have to have a direct bearing on each other. For example:
• By the time I reached the theater, my friend had left from there.
In the above sentence, my friend left before I reached. I need to stress this sequencing as both the actions are related in terms of the direct impact the earlier action has on the latter . Because of my friends’ leaving earlier and my reaching later, it can be understood that we could not meet. However, does it make sense to use the Past Perfect tense when I say the following:
• Emily found out in 2001 that India had gotten its independence in the year 1947.
Now, arguably India’s independence happened before Emily found out about the same. But do the two events have a direct bearing on each other? Nope! Emily could have found out that fact about India’s history some other time as well, say in 1995. Does the timing of India’s independence and the timing of Emily’s finding out have a direct bearing on each other? No, they don’t! Do you need to emphasize or clarify the sequence of events here? No, you don’t!
Now, in the sentence at hand, it is true that there are two events that are set in different time-periods in the past. But my questions remain the same :
Do we need to emphasize or clarify the timing of these events in terms of which event happened earlier and which happened later? Does the timing of the first event have a direct bearing on the second event?As regards the following analysis by you:
That age has now ceased to exist . so if we use simple past existed it would not convey the meaning.Why wouldn’t simple-past convey the meaning that the ice-age doesn’t exist anymore? What is the meaning when one says the following:
• We all boast of an era in which calm and peace existed among the various sects of the religion.
Now from the above sentence, is it not clear that the same calm and peace ceased to exist after that era?
Moving on, as mentioned by Krishna above, both “when” and “in which” can be used to modify time elements. However, if you observe, typically “in which” is used to modify longer periods of time, whereas “when” is used for relatively shorter time periods. Accordingly, you’ll see nouns such as “age” and “era” are normally modified by “in which”.
As regards posting analysis for each and every choice, Shraddha has already posted a detailed reply above. Please have a look at the same. In case you still have some questions, please feel free to post them here. However, when you do so, please make sure that you post your analysis of the various choices along with the same. We’ll take our discussion forward from there.
Regards,
Neeti.
_________________