Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 24 Oct 2016, 04:50

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 127
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 2

Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2011, 11:40
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Hi

Below is a sentence I have confusion about

The board is investigating the compensation packages of several executives in order to determine how much they may have been improperly awarded

this is not right according to manhattan gmat because underlined they could refer to packages or executives.

Question : Is it not obvious that they here refers to executives

Better : The board is .... how much these executives may have been improperly awarded.

Questio n : The above sentence even though more clear is not as concise. So in GMAT what is more important concision or clarity, though I also think going by logic they would mean executives, so no need for the better .

Thanks
 Manhattan GMAT Discount Codes Jamboree Discount Codes EMPOWERgmat Discount Codes
Manager
Joined: 10 Jul 2010
Posts: 196
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 12

Re: Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2011, 13:40
I think the they could be confused with either the BOARD, the PACKAGES or the EXECUTIVES, you may know that the board is collective singular, but others may not. (although referring to board doesn't makes sense, the anxious reader may bite for it)

Concision tends to be the last grammar issue to look for in SC. The second sentence you provided CLEARLY states it's the executives that are being investigated. Think of a five year old reading this and have them ask, who is they?

If they could be two things, there is almost definitely a choice that repeats the "obvious" subject
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1987
Followers: 2011

Kudos [?]: 6757 [1] , given: 260

Re: Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2011, 16:45
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
On GMAT, pronoun reference is governed by context or logic.
If there are two antecedents which may be grammatical referents of a pronoun, but if only one of those make logical sense with the pronoun, then there is no pronoun ambiguity. For example:

The car hit the tree, breaking its engine. - Here "it" can grammatically refer to either car or tree. But logically only "car" has engine, and hence "its" refers to car.
The car hit the tree, breaking its branches. - Here also "it" can grammatically refer to either car or tree. But logically only "tree" has branches, and hence "its" refers to tree.
The car hit the tree, breaking its parts. - Here also "it" can grammatically refer to either car or tree. And logically too both "car" an "tree" have parts, so in this sentence we have pronoun ambiguity.

Now lets consider the sentence in question:

The board is investigating the compensation packages of several executives in order to determine how much they may have been improperly awarded.

Likewise, in this sentence, both "packages" and "executives" make sense. Notice the two sentences below. Both are correct. So you may notice that we can get to either of these sentences if we replace "they" with these possible two antecedents.
Compensation packages may have been improperly awarded (to people).
Executives may have been improperly awarded (the compensation).
This is why there is pronoun ambiguity in this sentence.

Now lets assume, if we had the following sentence:
The board is investigating the compensation packages of several executives in order to determine how much they may have been improperly awarded to the executives.
Now only "packages" will make logical sense in place of "they". Thus, the sentence above does not have any pronoun ambiguity.

Thus, always go by logic to see if there is any pronoun ambiguity or not. Meaning is the key !!!

You may also review the following posts on pronoun ambiguity:
http://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=289 - No Ambiguity
http://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=285 - Possible Ambiguity

Payal
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Manager
Status: SC SC SC SC SC.... Concentrating on SC alone.
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 240
Location: India
Concentration: General Management
GMAT Date: 12-30-2011
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 47

Re: Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2011, 20:26
Hey check out MGMAT page 232. You will get clarified on the same.

Refer the topic of generic synonym for the antecedent.
_________________

D- Day December 30 2011. Hoping for the happiest new year celebrations !

Aiming for 700+

Kudo me if the post is worth it

Re: Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity   [#permalink] 07 Nov 2011, 20:26
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
pronoun question 1 25 Jan 2015, 09:42
737 Meaning/Clarity SC Question Bank by Carcass_Souvik 31 13 Jan 2013, 10:56
3 Good Question-SC Pronouns; concision 5 17 Oct 2010, 14:38
2 Pronoun Question 9 06 Jun 2010, 06:32
SC: A question about relative pronouns 5 01 May 2007, 02:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Question on Pronouns: Concision and Clarity

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.