Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus – the same str

This one tripped me up but I think I got it.


C. The H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918, also caused the 2009 swine flu; therefore, researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, children and the elderly included. wrong because of pronoun it - referring to flu, pandemic, or strain

D. Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus – the same strain of influenza that caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918 – researchers were convinced that it had the potential to kill many millions of people, particularly children and the elderly. I think is correct, but there is an ambiguous it that concerns me

E. Researchers were convinced that the 2009 swine flu – which could potentially cause the killing of millions of people, including children and the elderly – was caused by the H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918. - tense is way off, '-which could potentially kill millions of people' - this pandemic already happened it can't potentially do something it already did its action.

Meaning intended: Because the swine flu was caused by H1N1 (the same virus that caused massive 1918 pandemic) researchers were convinced its(Flu) is a killer

Thought process:

A. Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus – the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive 1918 flu pandemic – was why researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, especially children and the elderly. - Anything between the -.....- is additional info about H1N1, omitting it makes this sentence: "Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus was why researchers were convinced.." Use of because and was way is redundant. Nope

B. Caused by the H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza that caused the massive 1918 flu pandemic, researchers were convinced that the 2009 swine flu could potentially kill many millions of people, and in particular children and the elderly. - "Cause by the H1N1, researchers were convinced.." is a case of misplaced modifier. "Caused by the H1N1, the flu is considered" would work. Nope

C. The H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918, also caused the 2009 swine flu; therefore, researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, children and the elderly included. - Anything between two commas is nonessential. So "The H1N1 , the same strain...massive flu pandemic of 1918, also caused the 2009 swine flu". Here the use of 'also' ruins the independent clause (";" indicates the independence) that was about to be formed. Furthermore the second independent clause (after the ";") is started with a subordinating conjunction ('therefore') which is trying to make the clause dependent. Removing the ";" would have worked in the sentence's favor. Nope

D. Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus – the same strain of influenza that caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918 – researchers were convinced that it had the potential to kill many millions of people, particularly children and the elderly. - Here instead of modifying the researcher's conviction the use of 'because' (like in option A) makes the first half of the sentence a dependent clause which talks about the reason of the conviction, and so avoids the modifier tests. On removing non essential part : Because the flu is caused by H1N1- the same...1918- researchers were convinced its a killer. This is close to what we thought the intended meaning was.

E. Researchers were convinced that the 2009 swine flu – which could potentially cause the killing of millions of people, including children and the elderly – was caused by the H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918. - See the witch(which) do the test! Which here refers to the the swine flu (always the immediate noun). The swine flu could kill millions? Accepted. Moving on, Remove non essential: Researchers were convinced swine flu - which could...elderly - was caused by H1N1. Thats not right, the researchers were convinced it could millions! and this sentence just made that fact non essential. Nope

I agree cent percent. D could have been a lot more crisp.

+1 D

Ya even I narrowed it down to D & E but went for E because it sounded a lot better than E

Between D and E,

It in D refers to what ? Swine Flu or H1N1 Virus.

E remove the clause with which and read it sounds clear.

E is better.

Isnt the "It" in option 'D' ambiguous? Its not clear whether it refers to Swine Flu or the Virus?
Can someone explain this?

E completely changes the meaning of the sentence, in E the researchers are convinced that the flue was cause by the H1n1 whereas in the original sentence this is just the argument that led the researchers to think it could killed millions of people

therefore B is the only good choice, the sentence is clear and "many millions of people" is not really redundant. It gives additional information compared to "many people" (how many ? 100 could be considered many people...) and "millions of people" (well I guess "millions of people" could have the same meaning, but still addind "many" through not absolutely necessary emphasizes the main conclusion of the argument)

didn't see the ambiguous "it" I guess D can go away with it since all the others phrases have very strong meaning/grammar problems

The official answer for this question from MGMAT is "D" and here is the explanation regarding the dubious "it" in the answer choice "D" from the MGMAT moderator:-

Pronoun ambiguity is a real pain on the GMAT. For a while we thought that every pronoun had to have a clear referent, but then we saw that the GMAT sometimes uses pronoun ambiguity and calls the answers containing it correct.

You're right . . . we only have two possible singular nouns for "it" to refer to--the flu and the virus. You can try each one as a replacement for "it" and see which one logically fits. The people are actually being killed by the flu, not necessarily the virus, since other people may have been exposed to the virus and not gotten sick. Thus, the GMAT would probably think that this is not particularly ambiguous. As long as you have clear cut reasons to get rid of other answers I think you can feel comfortable choosing this answer.

The takeaway is to be careful using pronoun ambiguity to make eliminations. Try to get rid of more obvious grammar problems first.

Hi daagh,

In choice D, why don't we use past perfect to describe the event in 1918 as past tense can't describe 2 events that happened at different time in the past?

and why is pronoun "it" not ambiguous since it can refer to both swine flu and H1N1 virus?

Hi,

THE TWO POINTS YOU HAVE RAISED--


Both the events are not connected. the events are clearly shown by the years.



It is a subject here and would refer back to the subject of first clause and in this case correctly to Swine flu

hope it helps

daagh sir, doesn't E, changes the actual meaning.

Original meaning: Researchers were convinced that the swine flu, caused by H1N1 virus, is capable to kill millions.

Option E Meaning : Researchers were convinced that, H1N1 is the reason for swine flu.

[quote="rocky620"]daagh sir, doesn't E, changes the actual meaning.

Original meaning: Researchers were convinced that the swine flu, caused by H1N1 virus, is capable to kill millions.

Option E Meaning : Researchers were convinced that, H1N1 is the reason for swine flu.[/quote

Using hyphen and "which" together is redundant... Which is used to modify entity right before it, hyphen is used in the same way as well.. taking out hyphen and replacing it with which creates an awkward sentence structure..

Another reason to eliminate E

Posted from my mobile device

daagh

Thanks for your explanation..

Request if you could further describe the reason for eliminating E. Option E has been rejected owing to :-

'improper use of a connective relative pronoun in a parenthetical set up'

Which is the connective relative pronoun being referred to?

Hello PRamesh2008,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the relative pronoun referred to here is "which"; in order to provide extra information, as it is doing in Option E, "which" must be preceded by a comma, not a parenthesis.

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

Really don't know how D is the answer when there are 2 faults with it:
1. 'many millions' is redundant
2. Not clear what 'it' refers to (the virus, the flu or the pandemic?)

Hello SUV0508,

We hope this finds you well.

To provide a bit of clarity here, "many millions" is not actually a redundant phrase; in this case "many" is used to convey that there are a large number of "millions"; here, "many" is not used simply to convey plural, but to convey that there are a lot of something.

For example - "people" on its own simply conveys that there is more than one person, but "many people" conveys that there are a lot of people.

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

Daagh, can you please help me to understand the usage of "HAD" in the second part of the sentence: researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, children and the elderly included.

Thank you!