sleepynut
Hi sayantanc2k,
Yeah,I agree with all of you about this pronoun issue.
But Ron said this rule is no longer valid !!??? Is it so?
p.s. Please refer to the following link :
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... 33558.html
Hm, that's interesting! Ron obviously knows his stuff, but I'm deeply skeptical than anything has actually changed. I think Ron is suggesting that the GMAT has somehow updated the way it handles certain SC rules, but I'd be surprised if that were actually true. Perhaps Ron and
MGMAT have some insider knowledge that I lack, but it's rare that the GMAT fundamentally shifts the way it tests SC rules. If they've ever tested the rule (as explained above by @daagh), I can't imagine why they would suddenly stop -- and I also can't imagine that they'd tell us if they did.
But I'd love to be wrong! If anybody has some other evidence on this, let me know.
I also went through the most recent editions of the
OG and Verbal Guide, and I can't find a single violation of the rule. At least six questions have answer choices with non-possessive pronouns that could plausibly refer back to possessive antecedents; none of those answer choices are correct. (See
OG 2017 #687, 734, 776; Verbal Guide 2017 #260, 262, 278.) So at the very least, I can't find any evidence that the GMAT is willing to
break the rule.
And at the same time: I also can't find any explicit mentions of the rule in any official GMAT explanations. That doesn't mean much, of course: we all know that the
OG explanations aren't always all that clear. ("D is awkward and wordy." Gee, thanks,
OG!
) And it's also possible that I just didn't look in the right place -- maybe there's an official reference to the rule somewhere else. If any of you can find one, I'd love to hear about it!
Bottom line: I can't find any official violations of the rule, and I can point to quite a few questions where it seems to help eliminate a few answer choices. So unless somebody can come up with some more specific evidence, I'd stick with the rule for now.