Although offering a dynamic range simply absent on the

Very tricky and confusing. Not sure what the role of — indeed the name comes from the Italian forte (“loud”) + piano (“soft”) is in the sentence. maybe this is what confused me.

Meaning says, fortepiano did something earlier but now its doing something. Only B, clearly expresses that meaning.

Thanks for the Q, Mike.

What I don't quite understand about b) is how this is "100% correct", so as to say...

(B) Although the original fortepiano, (sth), offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord — (sth) — the fortepiano would now sound dynamically limited compared to our modern grand pianos.

Isn't this quite redundant/wordy?
Why not? Because the 1st is the "original" and the 2nd is the "current" one?

Most probably would say that placing "it" instead of the 2nd "fortepiano" would be ambiguous, but repeating the word sounds incorrect to me.
(I guess "sounds incorrect" is not good enough to eliminate an option)



Regarding d), couldn't the 2nd hyphen act as a semicolon, separating two independent clauses?

(D) Invented in the early eighteenth century, the original fortepiano offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord — (sth) — the fortepiano would now sound dynamically limited compared to our modern grand pianos.


Thanks in advance

Crystal clear, Mike.
Thanks a lot.

Hi mikemcgarry, I tried to contact you through PM here and Magoosh blog but I think I could not in either way.

Is there a way I can have a word with you?
I'd need to improve my verbal score (Q49, V35) in the next 30-40 days.

Maybe you can recommend some Magoosh product or sth like that, apart from the tips I've already read in your posts.

Thanks in advance.
Francisco

Mike, thanks a lot for the quick response.

It does make sense.

I understand this can be tough.
But on the other hand I'm confident I can do it: my mock scores were V38 (MGMAT), V42 & V46 (GMAT Prep) and V37 (Kaplan).
I mean, the goal will be to mantain/improve 1-2 points my mock scores. Am I correct?

I already read MGMAT books for SC and RC, which are my weak spots.
For CR I used Powerprep book. I'm OK in CR.

Questions:
I don't want to sound rude, not my intention at all... but,
do you think Verbal Magoosh subscription can help me with this "fine tuning" and advanced concepts I need?
Or this is aimed for going from 25 to 35, so as to say?

If so, which product do you recommend?
Just verbal or premium?

Also, since I'm retaking the exam and i work ~12 hours a day, would you recommend to use weekends to do mocks?
Or spend that time with concepts + spot exercises?

Thanks again.
Francisco

Francisco,
My friend, it sounds as if you are already quite strong in Quant. From the Quant videos, you may learn a new trick or two here or there, but given the huge increase you want in Verbal, I would recommend the Verbal only.

Understand that, given you time constraints, you have set a monumental challenge for yourself. You will have to devote every waking minute to verbal improvement, including full day sessions on weekends. Follow the one-month study schedule, as far as when to do practice tests and when to do other studying.

Can the Magoosh Verbal help with "fine tuning"? Yes, potentially. You see, in part it depends on what "fine tuning" you need. Magoosh has a thorough series of SC lessons, and more importantly, after each question, we have a video explanation: it's very important not to underestimate the amount of teaching that occurs in those VEs following the questions. You may find some concrete facts that will help you, and certainly Magoosh can help you build instincts for what to expect on the GMAT SC, what mistake patterns to spot, etc.

Finally, I will say: appreciate, once again, how hard what you are trying to do is. If you had a one-month vacation in which you could devote full time attention to GMAT improvement, even then, this kind of tremendous increase would be challenging. You want to improve this much inside a month while you are working 12 hour days. Wow! Magoosh will provide you with fabulous material, but you need to provide extraordinary discipline & determination & stamina to integrate all this and learn it thoroughly. You need to live & breathe excellence in your study habits. I almost hate to say this, but remember that getting adequate sleep, through the month, will be part and parcel of any deep learning, the brain needs REM sleep to integrate information at a deep level. Being successful will require, among other things, very skilled time-management abilities.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Good. Thanks.
I understand it will be tough.
I'll think about it and, if I get to join Magoosh, I'll probably let you know.

Thanks again for your replies.

Posted from my mobile device

For more insight on this really tough question (and to uncloud any issues that may exist), here's a similar one from OG:

OG15 132:
132. Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year—they are often green and striped, or have plenty of bumps and bruises—heirlooms are more flavorful and thus in increasing demand.
(A) Although appearing less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year
(B) Although heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year, appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins
(C) Although they appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins, heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year
(D) Grown from seeds saved during the previous year, heirloom tomatoes appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket
cousins
(E) Heirloom tomatoes, grown from seeds saved during the previous year, although they appear less appetizing than most of their round and red supermarket cousins

OE:
Rhetorical construction; Grammatical construction

The intended meaning could be communicated more effectively by mentioning heirloom tomatoes as early as possible in the sentence, so that we know that the writer is comparing heirloom tomatoes with supermarket tomatoes. The placement of heirloom tomatoes and heirlooms makes the sentence ungrammatical.

A This is ungrammatical. If heirloom tomatoes is the subject of are more flavorful … then heirlooms has no predicate and is nonsensically superfluous. If heirlooms is the subject, heirloom tomatoes has no predicate.

B Correct. The noun heirloom tomatoes is mentioned early in the sentence, followed by a parenthetical definition, and is the subject of the verb appear, and heirlooms is the subject of are.

C The noun heirloom tomatoes appears too late in the sentence. Parsing is made harder by introducing the pronoun they and revealing its antecedent later in the sentence. The sentence is also ungrammatical. If heirloom tomatoes is the subject of are more flavorful … then heirlooms has no predicate and is nonsensically superfluous. If heirlooms is the subject, heirloom tomatoes has no predicate.

D Beginning the sentence with the explanatory clause grown from seeds … gives it too much importance. It could be construed as the reason why heirloom tomatoes appear less appetizing, which is contrary to the truth. The sentence is also ungrammatical.

E Rhetorical structure requires that although appear in the beginning of the clause to which it pertains. Placing it later necessitates the pronoun they with antecedent heirloom tomatoes, which is redundant. The sentence is also ungrammatical.

The correct answer is B

In answer choice C

Although it offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord, the original fortepiano, invented in the early eighteenth century.

Is it correct to use the pronoun "it" without an antecedent? This I am asking ignoring other errors in this answer choice.

Hey Mike,

I get quite lost when it comes to the pronoun ambiguities. don't know how to figure out what a pronoun is actually referring to, particularly It, They, Them, Those, That. Is there something that I can do to understand the concept effectively?

Dear piyush_89,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, one feature of sophisticated English is having the pronoun come before its antecedent. This is a way to create a bit of dramatic tension in a sentence.
Although it offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord, the original fortepiano . . .
The antecedent of "it" is "the original fortepiano."
This sentence has the same structure.
While he was still a child, Mozart composed . . .
The antecedent of "he" is "Mozart."
By introducing the pronoun first, the writer creates a bit of anticipation. What is this "it"? Who is this "he"? You definitely could see this structure on the GMAT.

Also, it's good to be aware of the "empty it," an even more sophisticated structure.
The Empty ‘It’ on the GMAT Sentence Correction

Does this make sense?

Dear rekhabishop,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, first of all, this is almost an impossible question to answer in the abstract. We need examples. Do not, DO NOT, create your own examples. Find sentences from SC practice problems here on GMAT club and, for each one, ask how we know.

The pronoun-antecedent relationship is very complex and students often take it for granted. Factors to consider:
1) Proximity- sometimes a pronoun simply refers to the nearest eligible target noun
2) Parallelism- if a noun and pronoun are in parallel roles, that strongly indicates a pronoun-antecedent relationship
Julius Caesar did X to A, B, and C, and he then did Y . . .
Even though many other people in that sentence were mentioned, the pronoun clearly refers to Julius Caesar.
3) Rhetoric- the more focus and priority a noun is given in sentence, the more natural it is to receive the reference of a pronoun.

Finally, a great deal of the pronoun-antecedent relationship is deeply intuitive and cannot be explicitly spelled out in rules. The way to develop a deep understanding is to cultivate a habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score
No number of rules can replace the understanding gained from a habit of reading.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)

Official Explanation

(A)Although offering a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord, the original fortepiano, invented in the early eighteenth century

This is one of the classic mistakes on the GMAT Sentence Correction. A subordinating conjunction such as “although” must be followed by a bonafide noun-verb, not simply by a participle. Correct: “Although the original fortepiano offered etc.” Incorrect: “Although offering etc.” In addition to that mistake, notice that, after the first comma, we have the free-standing noun “the original fortepiano,” a subject without a verb. (A) has a few mistakes, so it is incorrect.

(B)Although the original fortepiano, invented in the early eighteenth century, offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord

This one correctly follows “Although” with a bonafide noun-verb clause. In fact, (B) is the correct answer.

(C)Although it offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord, the original fortepiano, invented in the early eighteenth century

This one correctly follows “Although” with a bonafide noun-verb clause, but then has the free-standing noun “the original fortepiano,” a subject without a verb. (C) is incorrect.

(D)Invented in the early eighteenth century, the original fortepiano offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord

This one begins with the statement “invented in the early eighteenth century”: this is a minor detail, tangential to the main point of the sentence, so it’s somewhat jarring as the opening of the sentence. The BIG problem with this one, though, is that we have an independent clause “the original pianoforte offered …” and then, after the dashed section, another independent clause “the fortepiano would now sound …” and there’s no conjunction. This is a run-on sentence, and therefore, (D) is incorrect.

(E)The original fortepiano, invented in the early eighteenth century, although it offered a dynamic range simply absent on the harpsichord

This one is strange. We get a subject, followed by a modifier and then a subordinate clause, but there’s no verb. We have a free-standing noun without a verb. This sentence has the form noun-noun-verb, not exactly a run-on, but still very much incorrect. (E) is incorrect.

Answer = B

Can someone reply how the verb-ed modifiers and verbs are working in each of these options??

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.