GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 22 Aug 2019, 08:58

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

Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 04 Mar 2017
Posts: 11
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jun 2017, 08:00
1
daagh wrote:
VishalOne wrote

Quote:
Can you help me understand how we identify the antecedent of a pronoun? For example, in option B, both "Elk" and "Rocky Mountains" are plural, so why can't "they" refer to "Rocky Mountains"?


B. The fact that Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but

Let's replace the pronoun in question with possible contenders and see which makes sense.
1. The fact that Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that the Rocky Mountains are mountain dwellers, but

2. The fact that Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that Elk are mountain dwellers, but


It is clear why the mountains cannot be the referent for 'they'


Thank you for taking time to reply to my query!!!
Can you clarify my following doubt:
it is easy to infer logically from the context that "they" should refer to "Elk". However, grammatically there are two possible antecedents for the pronoun "they". Don't you think this means there is pronoun ambiguity?
Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
_________________
"You can help me achieve my goal by sharing your knowledge"
Retired Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4790
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jun 2017, 08:22
1
Top Contributor
No. Not all; Pronoun ambiguity arises only when two logical referents are there for a pronoun and not when there is only one logical referent and just another or several other 'also - ran' contenders.Logic is supreme in pronoun reference.
_________________
The Take-Away: Grammar First and Then the Rest
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2016
Posts: 8
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Sep 2017, 11:45
Beyond700 wrote:
singh_amit19 wrote:
Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it seem that elk are mountain dwellers, while they once ranged over virtually all of the continental United States except for a small strip in the extreme Southwest.

A. Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it seem that elk are mountain dwellers, while
B. The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but
C. It would seem that elk would be mountain dwellers because of their living now solely almost in the Rocky Mountains, but still
D. Now living almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, it would seem that elk were mountain dwellers, although
E. It seems that elk would be mountain dwellers from the fact that they now live solely almost in the Rocky Mountains, since


'E' - incorrect - usage of 'would be' - a future tense. Also usage of 'Since' incorrect

'C' - incorrect - same as 'E'

'A' - incorrect - 'it' - Ambiguous and Farway Antecedent



'D' - incorrect - 'were' and 'now' doesn't reconcile.

Hence 'B' will be my choice of answer



Can you please explain from answer choice B what is the antecedent for " it" as in the sentence ELK is plural?
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2858
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Sep 2017, 12:41
arijitdas31 wrote:

Can you please explain from answer choice B what is the antecedent for " it" as in the sentence ELK is plural?



Hello arijitdas31,

I will be glad to help you with this one. :-)


The pronoun it in the correct answer choice is just a placeholder. When used as a placeholder, it does not refer to any noun in the sentence. It just occupies the subject or the object place in the sentence. For example:

    It was raining last night.

    Thunderstorm makes it impossible to fix the roof.


Same is the function of pronoun it in this official sentence.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Sep 2015
Posts: 47
Reviews Badge
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Nov 2017, 17:26
Let's try to solve this question as fast as possible!!

Meaning: Current Elk habitat suggest they live in the Rockz, but they actually lived somewhere else before.
We are looking for a contrast here.

A. Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it seem that elk are mountain dwellers, while
=> No contrast, gone.
B. The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but
=> Looks ok.
C. It would seem that elk would be mountain dwellers because of their living now solely almost in the Rocky Mountains, but still
=> Meaning fine, but double "would" = awkward, "their living" = ridiculously awkward
D. Now living almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, it would seem that elk were mountain dwellers, although
Now living modifies placeholder "it" in "it would seem" => gone.
E. It seems that elk would be mountain dwellers from the fact that they now live solely almost in the Rocky Mountains, since
=> No contrast, gone.

Answer: B

_________________
Insanity at its finest.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 46
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Dec 2018, 06:04
egmat wrote:
spider wrote:
humtum0 wrote:
Agree with A. In a "which" is modifying the entire clause.


I see a lot of people going for B...

B. The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but

I would go for B if you can explain who "it" and "they" are referring tooo..

Is elk - singular or plural -- thats my doubt...I see in choice A -- "are" referring to elk ...confuses me a lot.


Hi there,

This is the sentence with the correct answer choice B:

The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but they once ranged over virtually all of the continental United States except for a small strip in the extreme Southwest.

In this sentence, “it” is not functioning as a proper pronoun. It is rather working as what is called “a placeholder”. For example:

It is very windy today.

In this sentence, “it” is just functioning as a placeholder and thus does not have a definite antecedent. This is the case with the sentence in question as well.

Now, pronoun “they” is referring to “Elk” only. In three out of two choices, “Elk” has been mentioned as plural. This is not uncommon because there are many animals whose plural form does not take “s” at the end. For example: sheep, fish, deer, etc. Also note that the animals belonging to the deer family have the same singular and plural forms. “Elk” happens to be one of them. If you do not know what an “elk” is, read the answer choices. If any of the answer choices has a singular verb to with “Elk” then we may need to see if this entity is singular or plural.
However, in this sentence, it is clear that “elk” has been used as plural entity.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha


Hi E-gmat,


Is it correct to use the verb Would be in option C and E to express an assumption of what ELks are? Also, since it is backed by a fact shouldn't the result of it be presented as a fact. What I mean is we are already saying that Elk are found in the Rocky Mountains so is it mandatory to express where they dwell with Would be?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 15 Aug 2018
Posts: 51
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V45
GPA: 3.5
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jan 2019, 06:18
1
egmat wrote:
spider wrote:
humtum0 wrote:
Agree with A. In a "which" is modifying the entire clause.


I see a lot of people going for B...

B. The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but

I would go for B if you can explain who "it" and "they" are referring tooo..

Is elk - singular or plural -- thats my doubt...I see in choice A -- "are" referring to elk ...confuses me a lot.


Hi there,

This is the sentence with the correct answer choice B:

The fact that elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains would make it seem that they are mountain dwellers, but they once ranged over virtually all of the continental United States except for a small strip in the extreme Southwest.

In this sentence, “it” is not functioning as a proper pronoun. It is rather working as what is called “a placeholder”. For example:

It is very windy today.

In this sentence, “it” is just functioning as a placeholder and thus does not have a definite antecedent. This is the case with the sentence in question as well.

Now, pronoun “they” is referring to “Elk” only. In three out of two choices, “Elk” has been mentioned as plural. This is not uncommon because there are many animals whose plural form does not take “s” at the end. For example: sheep, fish, deer, etc. Also note that the animals belonging to the deer family have the same singular and plural forms. “Elk” happens to be one of them. If you do not know what an “elk” is, read the answer choices. If any of the answer choices has a singular verb to with “Elk” then we may need to see if this entity is singular or plural.
However, in this sentence, it is clear that “elk” has been used as plural entity.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha


Hey Shraddha,

why wouldn't it be possible for "they" to refer to the Rocky Mountains? I mean, obviously it would be illogical, but from a grammatical point of view, this would not be concise enough I guess...?

Best,

gota900
_________________
A kudo a day...
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 829
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2019, 22:07
many strange but correct patterns are in OA on gmat. gmat dose not want to test this strange pattern because testing this way disadvantage non native.

"make it seem that" is a correct patern. but honestly, I can not make a sentence with this phrase. luckily, gmat dose not test us this pattern. but we need to be ready to accept the strange pattern.

the takeaway is that focus on eliminating /realizing errors and accept the strange patterns.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it   [#permalink] 20 Jul 2019, 22:07

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 28 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Elk now live almost solely in the Rocky Mountains, which would make it

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne