According to scientists who monitored its path, an expanding cloud

When an introductory modifier includes a pronoun without an antecedent, the referent for the pronoun invariably BEGINS the main clause.
Consider the following examples in the OG12:

Q7: As ITS sales of computer products have surpassed those of measuring instruments, THE COMPANY...
Q28: Building on civilizations that preceded THEM in coastal Peru, THE MOCHICA...
Q31: Even though many of HER colleagues were convinced that genes were relatively simple and static, BARBARA MCCLINTOCK...
Q105: In HER book illustrations, which SHE carefully coordinated with HER narratives, BEATRIX POTTER...

In each case, the introductory modifier includes a pronoun without an antecedent.
In each case, the referent for the pronoun begins the main clause.

Generally:
If the original sentence conveys a logical meaning, we should eliminate answer choices that do not retain this meaning.
A: According to scientists who monitored ITS path, an expanding CLOUD of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth.
Here, the introductory modifier in blue includes a pronoun without an antecedent (its).
In accordance with the rule above, the referent for this pronoun -- an expanding cloud -- begins the main clause.
Conveyed meaning:
Scientists monitored the path of AN EXPANDING CLOUD of particles EJECTED from the sun.
Since this meaning is logical, we should eliminate answer choices that do not retain this meaning.

D and E: According to scientists who monitored its path, a large storm
Here, its seems to refer to a large storm, conveying that scientists monitored the path of A LARGE STORM.
Since the logical meaning of the original sentence is not retained, eliminate D and E.

Incorrect usage of 'which' as it points to the nearest noun 'Earth'. Also, the verbs tense is not parallel in 'brightened' and 'knocking out'. Incorrect



Usage of 'was what' makes the choice more verbose when removing it won't have any impact on the statement. Antecedent of 'it' is ambiguous, can be either 'large storm' or 'expanding cloud of energized particles'. So incorrect.



Correct usage of the modifier 'brightening' which shows the result of the action of 'triggering of a large storm' in the preceding clause, with the doer (subject) being 'an expanding cloud of energized particles'. 'Brightening' is also parallel to 'knocking'. Correct



Again antecedent of 'it' is ambiguous, also the statement changes the action of 'triggering of a large storm' into non essential modifier. Incorrect



Incorrect usage of the modifier 'brightening' changes the intended meaning. Also, 'brightening' and 'knocked out' are not parallel. Incorrect


Thanks
Saurabh

According to scientists who monitored its path, an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, which brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocking out a communications satellite.

It is a question based on Ambiguous pronoun "it" and intended meaning.

(A) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, which brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocking-> Which is modifying earth, Does earth brightened the Northern Lights.

(B) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun was what recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked-> It refers back to an expanding cloud or a large storm did, which is correct pronoun and Particles did brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked.

(C) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, brightening the Northern Lights and possibly knocking-> There is no "IT". Okay. So, our subject is "an expanding cloud of energized particles" which did "an expanding cloud of energized particles". It makes sense. Now, expanding, brightening.. and Knocking are parallel too. Let's keep it.

(D) a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, recently triggered by an expanding cloud of energized particles, brightened the Northern Lights and it possibly knocked-> Not again. A large storm possibly knocked...No! It was not.

(E) a large storm in the magnetic field surrounding Earth was recently triggered by an expanding cloud of energized particles, brightening the Northern Lights and it possibly knocked-> Same problem as D. Why are we talking about a Large storm.

So, I think C.

I eliminated option C because I thought there was a modifier error:

(C) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, brightening the Northern Lights and possibly knocking

- Was it ejected recently?
- Or was it triggered recently?

Please can someone explain if I have done something wrong?

Thanks!

Hi clover1987,

By modifier, do you mean the ejected/triggered split or are you referring to recently? We can start with triggered, which is the main verb here. We cannot assume that it is a (passive) participle modifier.

... an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth...

1. If triggered were a modifier, we would not have been able to add "a large storm..." (an object, something that tells us what was triggered) after it.

A partial meltdown triggered by a faulty reactor design... ← Triggered is a participle here. Because it is passive, there is no "what it triggered" after it. Also, this is not a complete sentence.
A faulty reactor design triggered a partial meltdown. ← Triggered is a complete (active) verb here. Given this meaning of triggered (triggered is transitive here), we must add a "what it triggered" after it. This is a complete sentence.

2. Similarly, because it is unlikely that the cloud (or particles) ejected like a pilot, we can assume that ejected is passive in this sentence.

an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun ~ an expanding cloud of energized particles that was ejected from the Sun (was for cloud, were if the reference is to particles)

Because (1) effectively means that triggered must be a verb, and (2) tells us that ejected cannot be a verb, we can be absolutely sure that triggered combines with cloud to create a subject-verb combination.

All of this is to say that we should not ask "was it triggered", because the cloud was not triggered. Instead, the cloud triggered something else (a large storm).

Now, if you were worried about the recently, my guess is that recently is meant to describe triggered, because it is not very close to ejected. The thing to keep in mind here though, is that it (recently) introduces a little bit of ambiguity in the sentence. That is all. This is not a major issue, and option C is still much better than the other options.

This is my first post in GMAT Club.


According to scientists who monitored its path, an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, which brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocking out a communications satellite.

Meaning: According to scientists who monitored its (Expanding Cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun) path
an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth
As a result :
-> This storm brightened the Northern Lights
-> possibly knocked out a communications satellite




(A) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, which brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocking

Issue: there is no verb after AND. "Knocking" is not a verb without helping verbs.

(B) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun was what recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked

Issue: Here "it" is ambiguous as it can correctly refer to the subject of the sentence. The meaning of the sentence becomes wrong. "was what recently triggered" is not correct: it means "an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun" was triggered by something.

(C) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, brightening the Northern Lights and possibly knocking

This shows the cause and effect correctly. "brightening the Northern Lights and possibly knocking" give the result of "triggered a large storm in the magnetic field".

(D) a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, recently triggered by an expanding cloud of energized particles, brightened the Northern Lights and it possibly knocked

Issue: This changes the meaning. Now scientists are monitoring the path of "a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth".

(E) a large storm in the magnetic field surrounding Earth was recently triggered by an expanding cloud of energized particles, brightening the Northern Lights and it possibly knocked

Issue: This changes the meaning. Now scientists are monitoring the path of "a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth".

Hi GMATNinja VeritasKarishma

Please help me with C and D. Many posts indicate that as per the intended meaning "Scientists were monitoring cloud and not storm", but isn't it logical that they could monitor the path of the storm as well?. Given I didn't get what scientists were monitoring I was able to come down to option C and D.

Although there is no error present in option C, I didn't see any error in D as well. Here is my analysis of option D, your response and time will be much appreciated.



We have "A large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, [modifier, modifying large storm], brightened the Northern Lights and it possibly knocked". Breaking down it further and removing the modifier for a moment the sentence is joined by "and" and looks like below

1. A large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth brightened the Northern Lights - In this IC we have "A large storm as subject and brightened as the verb"
2. It possible knocked out a communication satellite - "It" is the subject of the second IC joined by "and" and knocked is the verb

Now a lot of posts eliminate option D because of ambiguity of pronoun "it", but GMATNinja in your video on "Next-level Gmat pronoun", by using the example you, mentioned that "when we have two IC then subject of second IC can refer back to the subject of first IC unambiguously. So based on same logic isn't "it" referring back to a large storm unambiguously?

Yes, scientists could have been monitoring either. Both make sense. But I do not like (D) because of multiple reasons:

1. Use of "it" in the second IC.

It is not required and in fact, it brings in ambiguity.

A large storm ... brightened the northern lights ... and knocked out a satellite.
It is clear that the storm did both the things.

A large storm ... brightened the northern lights ... and it knocked out a satellite.
What knocked out the satellite? Probably the storm but why use "it" here? It just muddles the sentence.

2. I prefer the use of present participle which indicates a cause-effect relation as done in option (C).
... brightening the Northern lights and knocking out a satellite.

The brightening and knocking were the effect of "triggering of the storm". The storm didn't actively brighten or knock out though we do understand what was meant.

3. ...a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, recently triggered by an expanding cloud...
What was recently triggered by an expanding cloud?
Normally past participle modifier modifies the noun before it. But that is Earth. Before it is magnetic field. Before it is a large storm.
Ok, logic would say that the large storm must have been triggered by an expanding cloud but what a nightmare.

On the other hand, option (C) handles everything well.

Check out the video discussing this question here: https://youtu.be/5JWjr6qQAfY

This Q. confused me a lot on the path. Whose Path? an expanding cloud v/s a large storm.

I believe that in most of the tough questions in SC we are given multiple hints. Hence I decided to look for other errors.

Let's check for parallelism in "brightened X and also possibly knocking Y" . clearly A,E do not follow the parallelism ( check the forms of the verb used). ==>A, E out.

Note: in case of cause and effect relationship, in general, effect is showcased in the form of verb-ing. Out of B,C,D only "C" completes this rule.
==>C is the answer.

Extra Notes::
1: "A" is wrong for one more reason -- wrong usage of "which". Which here refers to earth but the earth did not brighten the lights.
2: in "B", "was" what" sounds redundant. extra emphasis is not required here. Since sentence is already lengthy and complex, I'd always prefer to keep it simple and short.
3: (D) is of the form, Modifier 1, modifier2, modifier 3 . This is not preferred as creates confusion.
Modifier 1 = According to scientist...
Modifier 2 = a large storm ....
Modifier 3 = recently triggered by ....

This Q. confused me a lot on the path. Whose Path? an expanding cloud v/s a large storm.

I believe that in most of the tough questions in SC we are given multiple hints. Hence I decided to look for other errors.

Let's check for parallelism in "brightened X and also possibly knocking Y" . clearly A,E do not follow the parallelism ( check the forms of the verb used). ==>A, E out.

Note:in case of cause and effect relationship, in general, effect is showcased in the form of verb-ing. Out of B,C,D only "C" completes this rule.
==>C is the answer.

Extra Notes
1: "A" is wrong for one more reason -- wrong usage of "which". Which here refers to earth but the earth did not brighten the lights.
2: in "B", "was" what" sounds redundant. extra emphasis is not required here. Since sentence is already lengthy and complex, I'd always prefer to keep it simple and short.
3: (D) is of the form, Modifier 1, modifier2, modifier 3 . This is not preferred as creates confusion.
Modifier 1 = According to scientist...
Modifier 2 = a large storm ....
Modifier 3 = recently triggered by ....

This Q. confused me a lot on the path. Whose Path? an expanding cloud v/s a large storm.

I believe that in most of the tough questions in SC we are given multiple hints. Hence I decided to look for other errors and ignore "whose path".

Let's check for parallelism in "brightened X and also possibly knocking Y" . clearly A,E do not follow the parallelism ( check the forms of the verb used). ==>A, E out.

Note:in case of cause and effect relationship, in general, effect is showcased in the form of verb-ing. Out of B,C,D only "C" completes this rule.
==>C is the answer.

Extra Notes
1: "A" is wrong for one more reason -- wrong usage of "which". Which here refers to earth but the earth did not brighten the lights.
2: in "B", "was" what" sounds redundant. extra emphasis is not required here. Since sentence is already lengthy and complex, I'd always prefer to keep it simple and short.
3: (D) is of the form, Modifier 1, modifier2, modifier 3 . This is not preferred as creates confusion.
Modifier 1 = According to scientist...
Modifier 2 = a large storm ....
Modifier 3 = recently triggered by ....

if "x do y" is logical, gmat can offer " a do y", which is not logical. if the sentence is long, this trick could be hard. but this trick is typical on gmat test.

so, if we read long sentence and have not understand the meaning. the first thing to do is ask ourselve "who do which". we often see there are many choices, "x do y" or "a do y" or "c do y" among answer choices. try to find our "who do which" is most logical, we will be fine.

when we read only choice A, we dont understand anything. so, it is likely that it is wrong because logical subject is replaced with illogical subject.
which should logically make brightening and knocking out. only storm or action of storm could logically do so. bingo. we can find the most logically choice

pronoun is also a meaning problem. gmat can put in many "it" and "they" to confuse us. find antecedant for "it " and "they' to realize illogical meaning instantly

egmat
ReedArnoldMPREP
EMPOWERgmatRichC
EMPOWERgmatVerbal

(B) an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun was what recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked --> NOT PARALLEL

Greetings!

I need a bit of clarification about Option B.

I understand that this answer is incorrect but of a meaning issue. So what I understand is an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun was what recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and that in turn brightened the northern lights and possibly knocked a communication satellite.

Whereas option B is suggesting that an expanding cloud of energized particles ejected from the Sun was what recently triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth and it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked

In Option B "it" refers to the expanding cloud of energized particles. And what this sentence then means is that the expanding cloud of energized particles brightened the Northern lights and possibly knocked a communication satellite. But this is not the intended meaning, it is the storm that was triggered by an expanding cloud of energized particles that brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked the communication satellite.

For the meaning alone B is incorrect. But I want to know whether B is correct grammatically. As per my understanding pronoun “it” would invariably refer to the subject of the main clause “an expanding cloud of energized particles”

Here I approached the question on the modifier issue and did not think about the parallelism issue at all.

, + and is used to connect two independent clauses. I thought the same is happening in the sentence.

And what is the parallelism issue here?

it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked - I understand the use of also is incorrect here.

It brightened and possibly knocked - is this correct?

I think B is incorrect for the following reasons:
Meaning issue
Parallelism issue “ it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked”
was what recently - this is wordy and not the best way to express.


But apart from the parallelism issue is the Option B grammatically correct. The reason I ask this question is I have seen the issue play a similar role in other official guide questions.

Also, how do I understand whether + and is connecting 2 independent clauses or whether it connects elements of a parallel list?

egmat


I know that comma + verb-ing modifiers can modify the preceding clause, however doesn't the modified action and the modifier action have to refer to the same doer? In this case, for option C, should it be the case that the cloud of particles triggered a large storm, and then that large storm brightened the Northern Lights and possibly knocked out satellites? How does the action in this comma+verb-ing modifier refer to the cloud of particles?

Also, how do we know if the "according to scientists..." is supposed to modifier the cloud or the storm? Logically, can't both the cloud and the storm have a path that's monitored by scientists (in fact, I think it makes more sense to say that scientists were monitoring the path of the storm than the path of the cloud)? If there's an alternative choice in which everything is grammatically correct but "according to scientists..." is directly followed by "a large storm...", how do we determine if this new choice or C is the correct answer?

Hello experts,

Many people are rejecting choice B on the basis of pronoun ambiguity ???it??? .
I think its clearly referring to subject of first clause and is not ambiguous.

Right ?

Hello dcoolguy,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, we agree we with you; there does not seem to be any pronoun ambiguity regarding the use of "it" in the sentence formed by Option B, especially as the non-underlined portion already uses "its" to refer to the "cloud".

The primary error in Option B is that it alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and it brightened the Northern Lights and also possibly knocked"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the cloud of particles triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and as a separate action, brightened the Northern Lights and possibly knocked out a communications satellite; the intended meaning is that the cloud of particles triggered a large storm in the magnetic field that surrounds Earth, and as a result, brightened the Northern Lights and possibly knocked out a communications satellite.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

'

Thanks,
I have one more doubt,
I read the first post of this question and the author reasons-(please have a look, since I can’t create a new post)
That D and E can be eliminated because“ magnetic field is in the Earth”, hence scientist are tracking expanding cloud not storm??
I don’t understand. -

I eliminated on the basis of original choice. I thought what original choice says is true.
But thats not the right way. Whats the correct way to eliminate D and E.

Thanks. "