By Friday evening the proposal had been signed by

By Friday evening, the proposal had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them has left messages on the page.

(A) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them has

(B) was signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them having had

(C) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom have

(D) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom

(E) was signed by over 1000 supporters, and many of them

POE (Process of Elimination)

• Split #1 - we need PAST PERFECT for the description of one kind of event

The phrase By the time X, Y indicates a time shift. At least one verb must shift to reflect that time shift.
The Y event happens before the X event.
Write X in simple past tense.
Write Y in past perfect (had verbED).

So by Friday evening signals that an event that occurred before that time should be depicted in past perfect.

Think about meaning and emphasis. The sentence is saying, "Wow, BY (at the time of, when that time hit) Friday evening, a lot of people HAD signed the petition!"

"By Friday evening" was in the past.
-- X event = simple past tense OR time marker
X = By Friday night
Signing the petition began before that time and was measured up to that time.
-- Y event = past perfect = had been signed

Options B and E incorrectly use simple past tense: the proposal WAS signed by 1,000+ supporters

Eliminate B and E

• Split #2 - Subject verb disagreement
Option A incorrectly pairs many of them (plural) with the singular verb has
Eliminate A

• Split #3 - Verb tense
Option C incorrectly uses . . . many of whom have left messages on the page.
The present perfect tense in HAVE LEFT is inappropriate.
-- the messages do not continue into the present
-- the effect of the messages does not continue into the present ("effect continuing into the present" does not mean that merely because the messages exist, they exert effect)
-- the action was not performed during a period that has not yet finished
-- the action is not repetitive and during an unspecified period of time between the past and now
-- the action was not completed in the very recent past and is not accompanied by the word "just."

We have two choices
(C) many of whom HAVE left messages
(D) many of whom LEFT messages

Which is better?

We are not given a past perfect option, many of whom had left messages. in D, the author chose a somewhat idiomatic construction in which whatever the subgroup indidentally DID is in simple past.

In English, we can "tack on" an another event in simple past tense. We have conveyed the correct emphasis using had signed. If we have never seen an answer like D, we choose it because C makes no sense.

The people who left messages did not do so after Friday night. If, as C suggests, the messages were still having effect in the present (?), then the acts of signing certainly would also. In that case both options would state, "By Friday evening, more than 1000 supporters HAVE signed the petition."

BY THIS time is a cutoff that marks off a time in the past. Whatever comes before is also in the past. (C) is illogical.

The sentence is describing something incidental that was the case BY Friday evening.
Many . . . LEFT messages.
LEFT messages was the case on Friday evening = simple past

Similar, correct: By the end of the marathon, more than 100 people had developed heat stroke, some of whom required IV fluids.

When in doubt, choose the option that is not nonsensical.

The correct answer is D

OTHER ISSUES and ANALYSIS

• Another issue: Comma splices.
Two independent clauses (a clause with a subject and verb that can stand on its own) may not be joined by a comma alone.
Wrong: The woman made a joke, the man laughed.
Correct: The woman made a joke, AND the man laughed.
Wrong: The woman made a joke while dining with friends, all of them laughed.
Correct: The woman made a joke while dining with friends, and all of them laughed.
Correct: The woman made a joke while dining with friends, all of whom laughed.


Many of tells us more about a certain subgroup of the supporters.
What did many of the supporters do? They left messages.
When we add this information, though, we cannot simply use a comma + many of them.

Many of them is a standalone subject with its own verb: Many of them left messages.
-- That sentence is an independent clause: subject, verb, and can stand on its own.
-- The first part is also an independent clause:
By Friday evening, the proposal had been signed by over 1000 supporters.

We cannot "stick" or "glue" those two italicized independent clauses together with nothing more than a comma.
We need a comma and a conjunction.
Sticking two ICs together with just a comma is called a comma splice and is ungrammatical.

Options A, B, and E create comma splices by using many of them.

• non-essential relative clauses

A relative pronoun such as who often follows a comma and modifies a previous noun but does not create another independent clause:
She was captivated by a relatively new musical artist, who was both gifted and underrated.
WHO refers to the artist and tells us more about him.

Non-essential relative clauses (e.g. who-clauses set off by commas) can be introduced by expressions such as some of or many of followed by the relative pronoun.
When we use prepositions such as OF, we use the relative pronoun in the objective case (i.e., it can be an object of a preposition: me, him, her, us, them, whom)

She was captivated by a quite a few relatively new musical artists, many of whom were both gifted and underrated.
Whom refers to the artists.

Relative clauses are not independent clauses, so they do not create comma splice problems in this case.

Options C and D correctly use a non-essential relative clause (though C gets the verb wrong).

-- Many of whom left suggestions.
-- NOT a complete sentence. (Good. We do not want a complete sentence. Then we would have a comma splice.)
-- Whom is an OBJECT pronoun.
The object of a preposition can NEVER be the subject of a clause and thus cannot create a independent clause.

• Verb tenses: REDUX

By the time X, Y is a signal that time shifts must be reflected by verb tense shifts.
Y event or events happened before the X event.
X takes simple past tense. It is later in time.
Y takes past perfect. Past perfect is called "the past of the past."

Usage of past perfect?
Well, in order to signal the past of the past, first we need a marked-off moment in the past.

Past perfect
(1) requires at least one event rendered in simple past or a time marker
BY FRIDAY EVENING is the time marker of that past.

(2) usually is NOT coupled with sequence words such as before, after, previously, subsequently.

To learn more about By the time X, Y
please see my posts on THIS THREAD, HERE.

ONE POST is HERE
Another post contains more explanation and a diagram. It can be found HERE

The answer is D

COMMENTS

liaoliao , Annet1524 and Xima , welcome. (Xima , I remember your username, just can't recall whether I've seen you on Butler)

This question is challenging.
It is also fair.
By Friday evening, how many had signed?
More than 1,000.
So, there were more than 1,000 supporters who, while signing, LEFT messages.

We can have a past perfect and more than one simple past tense event.
By the time means "at this point in time."
Please see the links I gave above.

Arvind42 , LUCIFER1703 , Ashokshiva , Doer01 , and baru all have correct answers.

Nice work.

The rest of you display pretty good reasoning.
As is characteristic, GKomoku left us with the best graphics on GMAT Club, plus a thank you. Definitely kudos.
Incomplete explanations receive a smiley face. Highlighting an error without explanation is . . . not explanation.

I am happy to see you all here.

Kudos to all.

Wonderful initiative generis!


_________________

Unnecessary usage of perfect tense is the key to this problem.

Proposal had been signed in past perfect tense and it makes sense only when 2 events of past are compared. Here it seems to be comparing with the past event Friday evening which makes no sense . Hence A, C and D are out

In B , having had looks too suspicious to be correct. The verb tense makes no sense at all. We can get rid of this too

Only flawless answer imo is E

Posted from my mobile device

(A) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them has - Them-has incorrect

(B) was signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them having had Them having had - sounds weird + tense is incorrect

(C) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom have InCorrect, many of whom correctly refers to supporters (in object). but Tense must be in Past (Leaving messages during the action of signing) +Past perfect progressive (Action of signing)

(D) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom Correct rectifies the error in C

(E) was signed by over 1000 supporters, and many of themWas signed - simple past is incorrect

(A) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them has
subject verb error

(B) was signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them having had
past perfect is required ......having had is also wrong

(C) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom have
the later past event can be expressed by using a date or another time reference
by(time refrence), is the indication to use past perfect ( used to express the continued effect by still later past time)
ex -By 1945, the United States HAD BEEN at war for several years
................correct subject... correct verb

had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom have
highlighted part is a subgroup modifier describing majority of 1000 supporters
(correct)

(D) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom (the verb is required over here)

(E) was signed by over 1000 supporters, and many of them

Sentence Structure
Subject - Verb:

By Friday evening, the proposal was signed by over 1000 supporters, and
many of them( supporters ) left messages on the page.

Issues:

The two independent clauses MUST be connected by -
Either: comma(,) + one of the F.A.N.B.O.Y.S.
Or: semi-colon(;)
The flowers are beautiful, they brighten the room. (Incorrect)

A, B, C and D - Structurally flawed( comma-splice)

Answer choice analysis:

(A) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them has

- Structurally flawed( comma-splice)

(B) was signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them having had

- Structurally flawed( comma-splice)

(C) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom have

- Structurally flawed( comma-splice)

(D) had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of whom

- Structurally flawed( comma-splice)

(E) was signed by over 1000 supporters, and many of them

E is the winner!

Declaration:

E is NOT the correct answer.
Issue analysis:

By the time X, Y indicates a time shift. At least one verb must shift to reflect that time shift.

Ex: By the time World War II ended, the nuclear-fission technology had evolved strikingly.
-----Evolution of the nuclear-fission technology(Before action) ------ | -------the ending of World War II (After action)--------

B and E - Time shift error

D is CORRECT answer.

I'm updating the answer as I don't want future naive GMAT club readers to mislearn, assuming that most kudoED-posts are by default CORRECT.
Let's grow together and TAME the beast!

Do follow the learning as posted by the uber-cool generis.
generis - Your actions do demand words of praise - Thank you!

_________________

This grammar was new to me, thank you for the GREAT explanation generis

_________________

Hi generis

I have one doubt. As stated in the official explanation by you that object of a pronoun can never be subject of a clause and hence cannot create an independent clause. If "them" is an object pronoun and so is "whom" then why is it that many of whom doesnt create a comma splice but many of them does so?

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

In the given Question there are two Takeaways.-
1. Two events in Past require usage of had been for the former event.
2. Use of relative pronoun whom for supporters.

DiyaDutta , you asked



The short answer is that whom is a relative pronoun that creates a dependent clause whereas them is a personal pronoun that creates a clause when paired with a verb—an independent clause.

• The two pronouns work differently.

Many of them is a noun. When you pair it with a verb, it creates a sentence.
Many of whom is a noun modifier. When you pair it with a verb, it continues to be a noun modifier.

• recognize which "subgroup modifier" creates a sentence

You should be able to see that one pronoun creates a complete sentence and the other does not.

I really want to avoid jargon.
I am hoping that you will simply "see" that "them" creates a full sentence.)

• only one of these constructions is a sentence

Many of them left messages on the page. ←← This one is a sentence.

Many of whom left messages on the page. ←← This one is not a sentence.

Many of them is a noun. When the noun phrase gets paired with a verb, voila, we have a sentence.
Examples:
(my new friends) Many of them enjoy my curiosity.
(poets) Many of them transform anguish into art.
(cars) Many of them now have blue tooth capabilities.

Many of whom is a noun modifier. The phrase takes the verb left but creates a dependent clause that modifies supporters. THat modifier is not an independent clause.

These examples are not sentences.
Wrong: (my new friends) Many of whom enjoy my curiosity.
Wrong: (poets) Many of whom transform anguish into art.
Wrong: (cars) Many of which now have blue tooth capabilities.

I will give you some resources, but I am about to give advice I almost never give:
Memorize three correct ways and four wrong ways to write these constructions.

• The ways to use MANY OF WHOM and MANY OF THEM

If you want to talk about a subgroup, use one of these three constructions:

1) Many berries grow here, some of which are poisonous but not deadly.
→ → some of which takes a verb

2) Many berries grow here, some of them poisonous but not deadly.
→ → some of them does NOT take a verb

Many berries grow here, SOME poisonous but not deadly.
→ → some does NOT take a verb.

These ones are wrong:

Many berries grow here, of which some are poisonous but not deadly.
Many berries grow here, some of them are poisonous but not deadly. [THE SITUATION IN THIS QUESTION]
Many berries grow here, some of them which are poisonous but not deadly.
Many berries grow here, some of which poisonous but not deadly. (needs a verb)

Those examples are inspired by the attached pages from Manhattan Prep Sentence Correction, 6th edition.

• Resources
If you really want more material, see this post, here, and this page on clauses, here.


BOTTOM LINE
• many of them is wrong because it is a noun phrase that creates a sentence.

This is a sentence: Many of them left messages on the page.

WRONG:By Friday evening, the proposal had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them left signatures on the page.

CORRECTED: By Friday evening, the proposal had been signed by over 1000 supporters, many of them having left signatures on the page.

• many of whom does not create an independent clause. Many of whom is a noun modifier.
Answer D IS CORRECT

SANAM pronoun + OF + WHOM/WHICH? Look for a verb.
SANAM pronoun + OF + THEM? Make sure that there is NOT a verb.

i hope that answer helps.

The MGMAT excerpt is HERE

_________________

Tushrgupta , #1 is not accurate.

In certain situations, if two events happen in the past and one precedes the other, we use past perfect (had verbED) for the earlier event—as long as we have the later event marked off using simple past or a time marker or the equivalent.

By the time X, Y is a signal that we should use past perfect for the Y events.

But plenty of sentences have two events whose chronology we can discern without the use of past perfect.
The existence of two past events does not automatically require that we use past perfect for the former event.

These sentences are all correct. All would be worse if I used past perfect for earlier event.

Correct: Before Daniel performed the dance, he rehearsed for days.
Correct: After Claire met Alex for coffee, she felt refreshed from the conversation.
Correct: Seven years before Hitler invaded Poland and started WWII, without ever having seen one of the devices, Marian Adam Rejewski, a Pole, reconstructed the German encryption machine called Enigma.
Correct: Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated on April 4, 1968, and people wept bitterly for days.

Certain cue words (such as "By the time X, Y) do indeed signal that usage of past perfect is appropriate.
Many other my other posts discuss other such cues.

The mere coexistence of two past facts, one of which is earlier in time, does not always require that past perfect be used for the earlier event.
Furthermore, certain conditions must be met in order to use past perfect for the former event: we need at least one event rendered in simple past, a time stamp, or some setting that marks off that simple past (such that the earlier event is the "past of the past" and we use past perfect).

Perhaps you meant to include the fact that phrases cue the usage of past perfect and that "by the time X" is among those phrases.
_________________

Options C and D, both are acceptable simply because we don't know if the messages are still there or have been deleted.

https://gmatclub.com/forum/by-friday-ev ... 98715.html

hello. I would like to ask about the question to which I am providing the link. the question uses a subgroup modifier and according to Manhattan gmat, 'many of whom' should be accompanied by a verb after unlike "many of them", which needs no verb. however, in this question they seem to ignore this rule. please explain.

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.
_________________