Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 15:53 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 15:53
Close
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
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
anuramm
Joined: 31 Dec 2003
Last visit: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 171
Own Kudos:
Location: US
Posts: 171
Kudos: 373
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Paul
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Last visit: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 2,707
Own Kudos:
Posts: 2,707
Kudos: 1,651
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
venksune
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Last visit: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 507
Own Kudos:
Posts: 507
Kudos: 160
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
anuramm
Joined: 31 Dec 2003
Last visit: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 171
Own Kudos:
Location: US
Posts: 171
Kudos: 373
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
C is the OA.
Can anyone explain why in option B -
Although it had been severely damaged by the collision and was already sinking,the coast guard arrived at the freighter in time to save the crew.
the pronoun 'it ' is a pronoun reference error. Doesn't hte 'it' clearly refer to the freighter.
User avatar
Paul
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Last visit: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 2,707
Own Kudos:
Posts: 2,707
Kudos: 1,651
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Although it had been severely damaged by the collision and was already sinking, the coast guard [...]
"it" does not properly refers to freighter. The first half is an introductory modifier and modifies the noun that immediately follows the comma.
User avatar
anuramm
Joined: 31 Dec 2003
Last visit: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 171
Own Kudos:
Location: US
Posts: 171
Kudos: 373
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Paul,
This is my understanding of misplaced modifiers.
When a sentence begins with a phrase, that phrase is supposed to modify the noun or the pronoun that immediately follows the phrase. Otherwise its a misplaced modifier.
There are two ways to correct this.
1. Place the noun or pronoun immediately after the phrase.
2. Change the phrase to a clause by introducing a subject so that it is no longer necessary for the first half of the sentence to modify the noun following it.

Eg from Princeton Review -
Although it is not quite as liquid an investment as a money-market account, financial experts recommend a certificate of deposit for its high yield.
In the above sentence, 'it' clearly refers to the certificate of deposit and not to the financial experts.

So why then do we say that the 'it' in our example doesn't have a clear referrent.
Thanks.
User avatar
Paul
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Last visit: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 2,707
Own Kudos:
Posts: 2,707
Kudos: 1,651
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In your given example, "it" refers to certificate of deposit because it is the only singular noun following the introductory modifier. However, I do not like that sentence since the modifier does not immediately modifies the noun following the clause.
User avatar
krish
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Last visit: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
Posts: 111
Kudos: 156
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
My choice is B
Correct me if my understanding is not right.

'Damaged by' seems to be a better usage when stating the cause of damage. 'Damage in' seems to fit well when the time factor comes into play.
User avatar
dj
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Last visit: 25 Jun 2012
Posts: 556
Own Kudos:
Location: Florida
Posts: 556
Kudos: 1,044
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
krish
My choice is B
Correct me if my understanding is not right.
'Damaged by' seems to be a better usage when stating the cause of damage. 'Damage in' seems to fit well when the time factor comes into play.


Both are right, but differs in context they should be used.

it all depends on the subect in question. when two or more elements are mutually involved in something, we use "damaged in".
--> Iraqi Islamic shrine damaged in attack.
--> Nuclear missile damaged in submarine base mishap.

and when the subject itself is causing the action (one sided) then we use "damaged by"
--> shops damaged by the vandals.
--> a mind damaged by addiction.
--> Notes on Emergency Drying of Coated Papers Damaged by Water
User avatar
ywilfred
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Last visit: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 1,987
Own Kudos:
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,987
Kudos: 2,051
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(C) it is ! The sentence should begin with naming the freighter as the pronoun 'it' could has no antecedent noun. (D) is out as it was also already sinking is unescessary.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts