OFFICIAL EXPLANATIONProject SC Butler: Day 192: Sentence Correction (SC2)
What is as vital in an icy land as the igloos OF [that belong to!] the Innuits? Their [the Innuits'] winter clothing.
This kind of sentence is called "inverted."
In English, the typical order is subject - predicate [verb + phrase], this way:
A brilliant but reclusive writer lived in the small apartment above me.We can invert the
subject and
predicate.
In the small apartment above me lived a brilliant but reclusive writer.To deal with inverted sentences, find the main subject and verb.
• Parsing this sentenceAs vital as their igloos, which permit the Innuits to live in reasonable comfort in an icy land, and just as ingenious,
are their winter clothing, so perfect in design and material that the Innuits are made nearly impervious against any arctic weather.
From the introduction, we know that
something is (or somethings are) as vital to the Innuits as their igloos are.
The igloos keep the Innuits warm.
The only noun that makes sense is
winter clothing.
We know that winter clothing keeps the Innuits warm from reading the phrase that modifies
winter clothing (
so perfect in design . . .))
We can do a short and basic rewrite with the words in the "regular" order.
The Innuits' winter clothing ARE [?] as vital as their igloos. Quote:
As vital as their igloos, which permit the Innuits to live in reasonable comfort in an icy land, and just as ingenious, are their winter clothing, so perfect in design and material that the Innuits are made nearly impervious against any arctic weather.
A) are their winter clothing, so perfect in design and material that the Innuits are made nearly impervious against.
B) are the winter clothing of the Innuits, so perfect in design and material that they are made nearly impervious to
C) is their winter clothing, so perfect in design and material that it makes them nearly impervious to
D) is the winter clothing of the Innuits, so perfect in design and material as to make them nearly impervious against
E) has been the winter clothing of the Innuits, so perfect in design and materialas to be made nearly impervious to
• Split #1: subject/verb agreementWinter clothing is singular. The verb should be IS. Their winter clothing IS as vital as their igloos . . . .
As vital as their igloos . . . and as ingenious, IS their winter clothing ...
Eliminate A and B, which both use
are and should use
is.
• Split #2: nonsensical meaningE) . . . the winter clothing of the Innuits,
so perfect in design and material
as to be made nearly impervious to any arctic weather.
Option E suggests that the clothing itself is made impervious to any arctic weather. Nonsense.
The
people, not the clothes, are made impervious to arctic weather.
Eliminate E
(Option E also contains a verb tense issue. No reason exists to switch from the non-underlined present tense in the which-clause to the present perfect "has been."
GMAC prefers simple present and simple past most of the time. You don't have to decide this issue, however, because the nonsensical meaning is fatal.)
• split #3: Option C is better than Option D(1)
IdiomThe correct idiom is
impervious to rather than
impervious against, but we can say that D is not as good as C for other reasons.
(2) Redundancy: There is no need to repeat "of the Innuits"in Option D.
-- As vital as their igloos, which permit
the Innuits to live in reasonable comfort in an icy land, and just as ingenious,
is the winter clothing of the Innuits, so perfect in design and material as to make them nearly impervious against any arctic weather.
Analyze the pronouns and antecedents from their placement in this inverted sentence.
(I am trying to figure out why antecedents are hard. The only thing that strikes me is that you must be trying to rearrange the sentence.)
We might temporarily rewrite inverted sentences in order to find subjects and verbs, but we do not analyze inverted sentences
as if they were in "regular" form.
In this case, "of the Innuits" is redundant because we have just read the first part of the sentence that mentions "the Innuits,"
We have just read this part:
As vital as their igloos, which permit the Innuits . . . (3) S
o X that Y is preferred to
So X as to Y--
so perfect ... that in (C) is better than
so perfect . . . as to in (D)
-- Both constructions are proper in standard written English, but GMAC has not been consistent about
so X as to Y.-- By contrast, GMAC has consistently accepted
so X that Y.-- GMAC has a marked preference for
So X that Y.-- GMAC's inconsistency will probably get cleared up, but until then, choose "so X that Y" if you are down to two options.
I have seen one expert announce a rule with respect to
So X as to Y and
So X that Y.Based on analysis of official questions, I do not agree with the content I saw.
I would not worry about trying to distinguish between these two; on the rare occasion that they are tested together, you have another way out (except for that one problem from OG2015 or OG2016, but I think that one question is an anomaly).
The issues in D are redundancy, lack of concision, an idiom about which GMAC has not been consistent,and unidiomatic usage (impervious against is not correct).
Eliminate D
The answer is CLet's check option C for meaning and pronoun clarity, since I see some confusion.
As vital as
their igloos, which permit
the Innuits to live in reasonable comfort in an icy land, and just as ingenious,
a is their winter clothing, [clothing that is] so perfect in design and material that it [the clothing] makes them [the Innuits] nearly impervious to any arctic weather.
• The verb is correct.
On the GMAT and in standard U.S. English, clothing is singular.(Pants and trousers are not singular. That usage is too controversial to test.)
• The subject of the sentence is?
Their winter clothing.
• In option C, all the pronouns have only one logical antecedent.
--
their igloos? To whom or to what does "their" refer?
Only two plural nouns exist in this sentence: igloos and Innuits.
--
their cannot refer to igloos. Igloos do not belong to igloos! They belong to people!
And indeed, the next phrase tells us who lives in the igloos. The igloos "permit
the Innuits to live" in reasonable comfort in an icy land.
Their igloos = the Innuits' igloos.
The Innuits live in the igloos. The igloos belong to the Innuits.
-- to whom or what does
their refer in "their clothing"?
Igloos? No. Igloos do not wear clothing!
We have just read about the only other plural noun, "the Innuits."
Their in
their clothing refers to the Innuits.
What about the antecedent for THEM?
-- Their = the Innuits'
clothing . . . is so perfect ... that it [the clothing!] makes them almost impervious to arctic weather. -- What is the only logical antecedent of THEM? Who or what is impervious to arctic weather?
Igloos? I think
not.
-- Igloos do not wear clothing. Igloos are not made nearly impervious to cold by clothing.
Them can refer only to
Innuits. Their [the Innuits'] clothing keeps them [the Innuits] warm.
Similarly, in the italicized phrase, IT logically refers to
clothing.The antecedent is not material. The clothing is [appositive] so perfect in
design and material -- those two words would require a "they," not an it.
If you think that IT confusingly refers to material, make your case. To me.
I will listen.
We are dealing with an inverted sentence. Do not rewrite it "forwards" except to get the bare bones idea of subject and verb.
COMMENTSmohammadzain , welcome to SC Butler.
I grant you all: this question is a bit of a bear.
You did pretty well. A couple of you did extremely well.
Nice work.
close
16 Nov 2019, 00:48
43%
(02:02)
wrong 
