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 Your Progress
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Apr 2012, 02:59
6
7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
15% (low)
Question Stats:
74% (00:51) correct 26% (01:06) wrong based on 357 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer from what remained of the inscription that the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt.
(A) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
(B) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists had inferred
(C) Although it had been partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
(D) Partially destroyed though it had been, the archaeologists had been able to infer
(E) Destroyed partially, the archaeologists were able to infer
Re: Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Apr 2012, 23:28
1
1
Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer from what remained of the inscription that the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt. (A) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer wrong modifier. " partially destroyed " modifies "the archaeologists" in this case. (B) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists had inferred wrong modifier. " partially destroyed " modifies "the archaeologists" in this case. (C) Although it had been partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer Correct (D) Partially destroyed though it had been, the archaeologists had been able to infer Wrong tense. Past perfect indicates sth happens before sth else in the past. (E) Destroyed partially, the archaeologists were able to infer wrong modifier. " partially destroyed " modifies "the archaeologists" in this case.
_________________
Kudos!!!... If you think I help you in some ways....
Re: Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Apr 2012, 00:18
Its not the archaeologists who are destroyed. So I am only looking to remove the ambiguity by either providing what is destroyed, or clarifying the noun / pronoun that the modifier applies to.
_________________
MGMAT CAT MATH http://gmatclub.com/forum/mgmat-cat-math-144609.html MGMAT SC SUMMARY: http://gmatclub.com/forum/mgmat-sc-summary-144610.html
WE: Corporate Finance (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Re: Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Apr 2012, 02:10
monir6000 wrote:
Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer from what remained of the inscription that the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt. (A) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer (B) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists had inferred (C) Although it had been partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer (D) Partially destroyed though it had been, the archaeologists had been able to infer (E) Destroyed partially, the archaeologists were able to infer
Kudos if u like it...
I am confused with times in the OA C: "it had been partially destroyed" and then "the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt"
It seems that the crypt was destroyed before Zonainos was buried...
Re: Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Apr 2012, 08:46
JubtaGubar wrote:
monir6000 wrote:
Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer from what remained of the inscription that the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt. (A) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer (B) Although partially destroyed, the archaeologists had inferred (C) Although it had been partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer (D) Partially destroyed though it had been, the archaeologists had been able to infer (E) Destroyed partially, the archaeologists were able to infer
Kudos if u like it...
I am confused with times in the OA C: "it had been partially destroyed" and then "the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt"
It seems that the crypt was destroyed before Zonainos was buried...
could you explain?
thank!
To solve, You can ignore the last modifier. Sentence is Although it had been partially destroyed, the archaeologists were able to infer from what remained of the inscription
Now onto your question inscription that the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt describes the matter on inscription the priest Zonainos was buried in the crypt - actual words written - this is what is inscribed.
If there is one pronoun and one possible noun antecedent, it does not matter whether the noun antecedent and the pronoun are both subjects, both objects or one subject/ one object. In such case, a pronoun subject of one clause may refer to a noun object of another clause. On the other hand, a pronoun object of one clause may refer to a noun subject of another clause.
However ambiguity may arise when there are 2 antecedents and 1 pronoun. Nonetheless, if there is one pronoun subject in one clause and one possible noun antecedent in subject and one possible noun antecedent in object in another clause, the subject pronoun would unambiguously refer to the subject noun by virtue of parallelism. In your example the pronoun it unambiguously refers to bull - this usage is accepted in GMAT.
In the question above, ambiguity does not arise at all (between archaeologists and inscription), since there is one pronoun it and only one possible (singular) antecedent inscription. It is not wrong that the pronoun is subject in one clause and the antecedent is in predicate of another.
Please note that ambiguity may still arise between crypt and inscription. However because of the relative distances of the nouns inscription and crypt from the pronoun it - moreover crypt is in an altogether separate subordinate clause starting with that - the pronoun it still refers, although slightly ambiguously to inscription. This usage is also acceptable and although slightly ambiguous, not sufficient to eliminate an answer.
close
74% (00:51) correct 
