Hi Talismaaniac,

The question of ambiguity with pronouns is maybe somewhat ambiguous itself .

In general though, if a pronoun can plausibly refer to more than one subject it is considered ambiguous. What constitutes plausible of course allow a little wiggle room in interpretation. Let's look at your first example.

1. Researchers claim to have developed new "nano-papers" incorporating tiny cellulose fibers, which THEY allege give THEM the strength of cast iron.

Could researchers have the strength of cast iron? Plausibly no, one might think, as even the strongest power lifter doesn't quite have the strength of cast iron. The thing is people can be strong. And in hundreds years, perhaps we will have the (ahem) technology to have humans with the strength of cast iron (again the comparison isn't directly apt, as cast iron strength doesn't completely relate to human strength).

However, let's compare the ambiguity to the potential ambiguity in the second sentence.

2. Confronted by radical changes in production and distribution, modern Hollywood studios are attempting various experiments in an effort to retain THEIR status as the primary arbiter of movie consumption.

Do you know any experiments that direct movies? No, the question is utterly absurd and nonsensical. Therefore, we would not suggest that experiments are trying to retain their status as the arbiter of movie consumption. It is clear that only humans create movies (vs. the first sentence that talks about strength, something displayed by both humans and metals).

Therefore, a pronoun is not ambiguous if it reasonably can refer to only one noun. And by reasonably/plausibly I mean it does not lead to arrant nonsense, the way experiments (abstract noun) starts doing things only humans do.

Hope that helps .
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep

I am also unable to see the reason behind the dichotomous explanation of the originator (which incidentally I suppose is the rated MGMAT Review, and not the Manhattan Review (MR), which is a different company)

Let us now dissect the issue.




The cause of disagreement is that the pronoun they could refer to both researchers and nano papers, structurally and plausibly logically. So let us replace the pronoun with both referents and see which suits logically better.


1. Researchers claim to have developed new "nano-papers" incorporating tiny cellulose fibers, which researchers allege give THEM the strength of cast iron.—

2. Researchers claim to have developed new "nano-papers" incorporating tiny cellulose fibers, which nano papers THEM the strength of cast iron.—
Can nano papers allege? Please ponder. On the contrary, the subject pronoun they stands for the subject of the sentence namely researcher and therefore by that rule, it will be prudent to accept researchers as the referent for they.

The object pronoun them will also go better with the object of the sentence -nano-papers. Logically too, them cannot refer to researchers because the researchers' job is to do research and not turn iron-strong by consuming papers
_________________

” I truly believe in online learning, I have been a student in both an Ivy League school (brick and mortar) and in an online setting and I have learned 1,000 times more in an online setting. You do not have anyone there lecturing you and then you do the work, online you are made to do it all yourself. Amazing how different the results are. - Heather(a student)”

Alicia Helle, an online student at the UW, "Obtaining my degree online has been a blessing. With two small children, I am able to work when it is convenient for my family and me. I have nothing but positive comments and experiences from my time at UW-Stout.”

Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates