In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille, Vincent van Gogh's view

dcummins , I agree that native speakers will mentally "override" what appear to be tiny differences about which noun (painting or Rhone) was sold for $20.2 million.

As a native speaker, I do not think about "incorrect comparisons" in this kind of sentence,
although I certainly can do so. Maybe the better phrase would be "incorrect equivalencies." A river is not a painting.

Because of grammar rules, Answers B and E state that the Rhone River sold for $20.2 million.

The sentences do not contain a traditional comparison such as "X is more than Y."
Answers B and E are constructed in ways that make the river the thing that gets sold.
The nouns are not equivalent. The painting was sold, not the Rhone River.

In this case, to see that B, D, and E do not convey the correct meaning,
it may easier to use the modifier rules, namely, rules about
-- which
-- appositives, and
-- past participles.

I can eliminate B, D, and E quickly based on these rules.

• Answer C correctly avoids using [comma + which].

-- COMMA + WHICH
As a general rule, which modifies (refers to) the immediately preceding noun or to a noun that is very close.

Because which modifies the immediately preceding noun, and because Rhone immediately precedes which, in Answer B (top of post), [the river] Rhone was sold for $20.2 million.

Modifiers of nouns usually should "touch" the noun that they modify.
(Exceptions are mentioned below. This construction is not an exception.)

• Appositives

-- Nonessential appositives that come in the middle of a sentence must be set off by TWO commas.
-- Answer C correctly contains a second comma after the word Rhone.
-- The second comma sets off the descriptive phrase (the appositive)
from the actual subject of the sentence. The subject is the painting titled The Bridge of Trinquetaille.

-- Without the second comma, we have nonsense. The subject is stranded behind the first comma and is not connected to the verb. Option D lacks the second comma.

-- In addition, Option C does not add the extra and probably incorrect word "being" into the second appositive phrase.
(I say "probably" incorrect because the issue isn't clear; present participles modify the previous clause, but technically no subject exists in the previous clause.)

• Past participles modify the immediately preceding noun

-- Option C correctly avoids a construction in which the past participle "sold" refers to "Rhone"
-- RULE for past participles on the GMAT:
If we have [comma + past participle] (verbED/SOLD), then
the past participle modifies only the immediately preceding noun or noun phrase.

Sold cannot "jump back" over a whole phrase to reach its subject, the painting.

In E sold incorrectly refers to the immediately preceding noun, Rhone.

Below** is a fuller description of the rules.

Option C, inserted into a shortened version of the sentence:
C) In 1987, The ABC Painting, van Gogh's view of XYZ over the Rhone, was sold for $20.2 million, the second highest price ever paid for a painting.

Answer (C) is the only option that correctly connects
the verb phrase was sold for $20.2 million
to the subject of the sentence, The ABC Painting.
because C does not use which, or a poor appositive construction, or a past participle.

I hope that analysis helps.

**More on [comma + which], appositives, and [comma + past participle (verbEd)]

• comma + WHICH

(1) as a general rule, [comma + which] modifies the immediately preceding noun or a noun that is very close

-- which clauses describe nouns (the which refers to that very noun), so we generally follow the "modifier touch" rule. The touch rule holds that the description of the noun should be next to the noun being described.

Correct: He hiked on the path, which cut through a meadow, to revisit the fishing pier at the lake.
The path cut through the meadow.
Wrong: He hiked on the path to revisit the fishing pier at the lake, which cut through a meadow.
The lake did not cut through the meadow.

Not applicable /Exceptions
-- The "which-touch" rule does not apply to OF which, FOR which, TO which, etc.

-- The most common exception to the which-touch rule on the GMAT is a noun followed by a prepositional phrase.
The modifier which can "reach back" over a prepositional phrase to modify another close noun.

Correct: He hiked on the path of hard dirt, which cut through a meadow, to revisit the fishing pier at the lake.
-- In this case, which still refers to path because "of hard dirt" also describes the path.
That prepositional phrase cannot be placed elsewhere in the sentence, so which "reaches back" to the logical noun path.

(2) [comma + which] cannot modify the entire previous clause.
-- [comma + which] also cannot modify (refer to) an idea or action or phenomenon.
When natives speak English, we often use "which" to refer to "the phenomenon I just mentioned," but on the GMAT, doing so is incorrect.

Wrong: Gang activity increased sharply in Japan , which worried members of the police force.
which cannot stand for that whole phenomenon gang activity increased in Japan

Correct: Gang activity increased sharply in Japan, an increase that worried members of the police force.

• Appositives

-- almost always immediately follow a noun, and
-- describe or rename that noun.
-- If the appositive phrase is nonessential, it is set off by commas.

-- Whatever is "fenced in" by one comma (beginning or end) or two commas (middle of sentence) can theoretically be removed.
This site, here has three good examples of the ways in which commas are placed. Scroll down to "Punctuate the Appositive Correctly."
-- Appositive at the beginning of the sentence? ONE comma at the end of the appositive phrase
-- Appositive at the end of the sentence? ONE comma before the beginning of the appositive phrase
-- Appositive in the middle of the sentence? TWO commas. One comma goes before the first word of the phrase. The other comma is placed after the last word of the phrase.

• comma + past participle (verbED)

-- GMAT follows an unusual rule. Most grammarians allow [comma + past participle] to modify the entire previous clause.
GMAT does not.
-- If we have [comma + past participle], the past participle modifies the immediately preceding noun.

Correct Archaeologists were excited to examine the ancient manuscripts, found accidentally by a sheep farmer.

-- Careful (not applicable here): IF the past participle anchors an introductory clause or phrase, then the past participle modifies the subject of the subsequent clause.
Correct: Exhausted by his long trek to the border, the refugee collapsed.
Exhausted modifies the refugee.
_________________

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning of this sentence is that in June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille was sold for $20.2 million, which was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Grammatical Construction + Redundancy/Awkwardness

• Semicolons and the “comma + conjunction” construction are used to link two independent clauses; commas are used to link an independent clause with a dependent one; a comma cannot be used to join two independent clauses.
• Only similar elements can be listed together; in this case, the phrases involved have different roles in the correct meaning of the sentence.
• “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense; the use of passive continuous must be justified in the context.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses “and” rather than the “comma + conjunction” construction to join the independent clauses “In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille...sold for $20.2 million” and “it was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction”; please remember, semicolons and the “comma + conjunction” construction are used to link two independent clauses; commas are used to link an independent clause with a dependent one; a comma cannot be used to join two independent clauses.

B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "The Bridge of Trinquetaille...was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction"; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that The Bridge of Trinquetaille itself...was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction; the intended meaning is that The Bridge of Trinquetaille was sold for $20.2 million, and this price was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.

C: Correct. This answer choice correctly uses the clause "The Bridge of Trinquetaille...was sold for $20.2 million" and correctly modifies "$20.2 million" with the "second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction", conveying the intended meaning - that The Bridge of Trinquetaille was sold for $20.2 million, and this price was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction. Further, Option C avoids the grammatical construction error seen in Option A, as it only includes one independent clause. Besides, Option C is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

D: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly utilizes the word “being”, leading to redundancy; “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense.

E: This answer choice incorrectly gives a list-like treatment to phrases “sold for $20.2 million”, and “was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction”, illogically implying that The Bridge of Trinquetaille itself...was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction; the intended meaning is that The Bridge of Trinquetaille was sold for $20.2 million, and this price was the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction; please remember, only similar elements can be listed together; in this case, the phrases involved have different roles in the correct meaning of the sentence.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Usage of Periods and Semicolons" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

C.

You need a comma after "Rhone" because that phrase is describing The Bridge of Trinquetaille. So were down to B, C, and E. B is wrong because which incorrectly modifies Rhone. C is better than E because it is more concise.

nice. i like this question. there are 2 appositives that helped me pick C.

In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille, Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron ridge over the Rhone, was sold for 20.2million, the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.

Yes, C is right.

A - Pronoun reference error.
B - was is incorrect. - As per the stetement, the painting is still the 2nd highest .. but The option B implies that the painting is no more the second highest ...
C - Correct
D - Passive voice..
E - same reason of B.

I believe the OA is C

(A) Rhone sold for $20.2 million and it was
Wrong : Here it is ambiguous, because not sure where it's pointing i.e. whether it's Rhone or iron bridge or The Bridge of Trinquetaille
(B) Rhone, which sold for $20.2 million, was
Wrong : Here which is pointing to Rhone rather than The Bridge of Trinquetaille
(C) Rhone, was sold for $20.2 million,
Correct:Because this implies that The Bridge of Trinquetaille was sold for $20.2 million,the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.
the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction correctly modifies 20.2 million.
(D) Rhone was sold for $20.2 million, being
Wrong: Because this sentence says that being the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction , the painting was sold for $20.2 million and that of course is not case here.
(E) Rhone, sold for $20.2 million, and was
Wrong: Here the two events are independent , sold for $20.2 million and the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction, but that's not true over here 2nd is the cause of 1st.


Please correct me if I am wrong . More than happy to learn more from here

I think the answer is 'C'.
Words like 'It', 'being' etc are not required here and make the sentence ambiguous i.e. do they refer to $20.2 million or the painting ??? That's my take...

C clearly states that $20.2 million was the 'second highest price ever paid.....' which makes more sense.

I am a bit confused with the non-underlined part of the sentence... 'The Bridge of Trinquetaille' is referred as 'Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron bridge over the Rhone'. What does the 'view' actually mean here ?? I am assuming it's the same as a 'painting' in the art vocabulary???

kaptain, The Bridge of Trinquetaille is the name of the painting and the subject, and Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron bridge over the Rhone is used here to describe the painting/subject.

C is best.

The Bridge of Trinquetaille cannot be "the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction." The previous phrase needs to modify some monetary figure. C is the only answer choice that allows "$20.2 million" to be modified. The other choices modify the painting instead.

the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.

Dear Mod what is the role of above in answer C.

An appositive, i.e. a noun (or noun phrase) modifying another noun (or noun phrase).

Here "the second highest price ever paid for a painting at auction" is a noun phrase ("price" is the noun preceded by an adjective, "the second highest" and followed by a past participle modifier "ever paid for a painting at auction"). This noun phrase refers to the noun "$20.2 million".

(P.S.: Do not mistake an appositive for an absolute phrase - an absolute phrase refers to a whole clause, though in form may be the same.)

In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille, Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron ridge over the Rhone sold for $20.2million and it was the secnd highest price ever paid for a painting at auction.

A: Rhone sold for $20.2million and it was

- Statement - "Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron ridge over the Rhone" is describing "The Bridge of Trinquetaille" and hence there should be a comma after Rhone. Also it does not correctly refers to the bridge.

B: Rhone, which sold for 20.2million, was

- Here Which refers to Rhone which is incorrect

C: Rhone, was sold for 20.2million,

- Correct - Comma is given after Rhone, and was sold is the correct verb form here

D: Rhone was sold for 20.2million, being

- Missing comma after a descriptive phrase and being is incorrect as well

E: Rhone, sold for 20.2million, and was

- need was sold form of the verb here.

Hence, answer is C

Hi Experts,

In a and e, 'sold' is a past participle and not a verb, correct? Any tips on how do we check whether its a main verb or not? Thanks!

Hi sdlife, that's correct.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses a simple framework to distinguish between Simple Past Tense and Past Participle, its application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

hey generis, can you please highlight the appositive in the above sentence ? sometimes i get confused when we must use comma and when not

For example in the sentences below can you check if understand modifiers/commas concept corect...

In good years, the patchwork of green fields, that surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles .. (surrounds modifies patchwork cause i added comma)

In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustle .. (surround modifies fields so we dont use comma )

appreciate your help:)

Basic rules:

1. You can not insert comma before that
2. Comma does mean nothing when you decide what part following modifier should "touch"
3. That/which are relative but not appositive pronouns
4. I read Anna Karenina, masterpiece by Tolstoy, in my room yesterday. - blue text is an example of appositive modifier.

Hi,

Can someone please explain why B, D and E are incorrect? I'm having issues retraining my brain to spot this.

I'm a native english speaker.

Both B and E are suggesting that The Bridge of Trinquetaille was the second highest price ever paid for a painting.

This is an incorrect comparison, since a painting cannot be a price.
_________________

Thanks, but Is that really the case? The correct answer uses a similar construction, so I don't understand how your explanation works.

generis?