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

 It is currently 24 Jan 2019, 02:50

### 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

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

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Key Strategies to Master GMAT SC

January 26, 2019

January 26, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this webinar to learn how to leverage Meaning and Logic to solve the most challenging Sentence Correction Questions.
• ### Free GMAT Number Properties Webinar

January 27, 2019

January 27, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this webinar to learn a structured approach to solve 700+ Number Properties question in less than 2 minutes.

# Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 03 Mar 2013
Posts: 42
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 3
WE: Information Technology (Telecommunications)
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2013, 01:47
29
60
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

28% (02:10) correct 72% (02:10) wrong based on 1485 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

(A) Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

(B) Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

(C) Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

(D) Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds

(E) Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound
Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4629
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 22:40
6
1
One requires a working knowledge of molecular biology to understand the full implication of this example

Science has discovered two genes in Human DNA that can potentially cause breast cancer (BRCA stands for Breast Cancer) BRCA1and BRCA2. When these genes are extracted out of the DNA, the DNA becomes BRCA-free. This is what the company claims as the new DNA compound. But so much research is abounding in molecular biology that the BRCAs themselves are intense research subjects while the new BRCA - free DNA is also the subject of immense research.
In the light of the above, to isolate ‘them’ may mean isolating the two types of genes (plural); to isolate ‘it’ may mean to isolate the BRCA - free DNA, the new compound (singular)

Now let’s try to tenderize the various permutations and combinations.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound --- to isolate them (both genes) can go with only the plural research subjects – Therefore, wrong

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound –---having had extracted is awful.

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound – ----isolate it and a research subject go in tandem. It refers to the new BRCA-free DNA compound; may be the best choice IMO

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds – The main clause is a problem, there is only one new DNA compound, not compounds as has been made out in the choice

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound ---- One can have only one patent for one research subject i.e. the new DNA compound. The plural ‘its patents’ is wrong.

In any case, the OA doesn’t hold water. And to take into account of so many things in the exam hall is unthinkable. Can it truly be a GMAT problem, considering so much technical things are involved? GOK

@HumptyDumpty: You said that we do have a VERITA’S Rep here. Can you kindly get hold of him to seek the OE?
_________________

you can know a lot about something but not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 50
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2013, 14:22
5
1
For me its A for the following reasons:

B: ..as research subjects.. (Plural), WRONG, later in non-underline part of the sentence, supreme court are contesting it (singular) clearly refers to the reasearch.
C: .. to isolate it.. (singluar), WRONG, Myriad Genetics isolate BRCA1 and BRCA2 (plural).
D: same problem as B
E: same problem as B

Hope it helps!
_________________

MV
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing.” ― George S. Patton Jr

##### General Discussion
Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4629
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2013, 09:28
2
2
IMO, in choice D, the ‘it’ in the non-underline refers to the company or may be even to the company’s feeling (meaning claim) that it is entitled for patents. But it does not matter to us because it is in non-underline and doesn’t materially affect the example. But the ‘it’ in the underline cannot refer to anything other than company; If we were to take the ‘it’ to refer to patents, the meaning is going to be weird. Let’s see how. We shall now replace the ‘it’ with patents and see how good it is.

D.( the re-phrased version) Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels patents is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.
We can see how the reference of the ‘it’ to patents is bizarre.
So I feel there is no reference problem of the pronouns in D; I would take it as passable logically.

Sdas, I am not clear what you say about the referent of ‘them. As far as the placement of ‘now’ is concerned, it isn’t so critical IMO, whether it feels or it now feels. In a way, the present tense verb ‘feels’ itself may imply' now', a present status.
_________________

you can know a lot about something but not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Intern
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 25
Location: United States
Concentration: Operations, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15, NUS '16
GMAT Date: 08-27-2013
GPA: 3.46
WE: Project Management (Other)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 10:19
5
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound , but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound ---"subject" which is singular modifying "them" or "genes" which is plural and "compound" which is singular modifying "genes" which is plural.So oincorrect

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound -- usage of past perfect tense is wrong.So Incorrect

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound --- "subject" actually should refer back to genes but here it is referring to "DNA" Incorrect

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds--- "subjects" -plural referring back to genes" and "compounds" --plural referring "genes" --plural correctly

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound -- "compound" singular referring to "genes" --plural .Incorrect
_________________

.........................................................................................
Please give me kudos if my posts help.

Intern
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 15
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Kellogg '16
GPA: 3.64
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2013, 23:06
5
1
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound.

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound

IMO A. The marked portions are the incorrect parts of the sentence.
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Intern
Joined: 09 Jun 2012
Posts: 16
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jul 2014, 01:35
2
thelosthippie wrote:
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound

The 'it' in the non underlined part refers to the singular Patent, so options D and E are out.

A:[CORRECT]Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound,but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.
The 'it' (singular) in the non underlined part refers to the patent. Them correctly refers to BRACA1 and BRACA2.

B.[INCORRECT]Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.
'Having Had' makes this option incorrect.

C.[INCORRECT] Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the
new DNA compound
'it' cannot refer to BRCA1 and BRCA2 we need plural here, so this option is incorrect.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1007
Location: United States
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2014, 23:40
2
1
Super tough question!

Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Correct.

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Wrong. Wrong. "now" + simple present tense ==> wrong.

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Wrong. "it" does not match with "BRCA1 and BRCA1"

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds
Wrong. "compounds" does not match with "it" in the non-underlined part (highlighted blue above)

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound
Wrong. "now" + simple present tense ==> wrong.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 54
Re: New Project - Having extracted the BRCA1  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2014, 21:24
2
2
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Correct: "them" correctly refers to "BRCA1" and "BRCA2"; "it" and "its" correctly refers to "research subject". The research has to be patented!

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Incorrect: singular "it" and "its" cannot refer to plural "subjects"

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
Incorrect: wrong usage of "it" instead of "them"

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds
Incorrect: same as B

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound
Incorrect: Myriad is not being entitled, but her "subject" is entitled.
Manager
Status: Manager
Affiliations: Manager
Joined: 06 Nov 2012
Posts: 128
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
Schools: Boston U '19 (D)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q49 V33
GPA: 3
WE: Supply Chain Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: New Project - Having extracted the BRCA1  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2014, 04:30
1
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound – Correct

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound – Past Perfect is not required. ‘Subjects’ must be singular to confirm with singular pronoun ‘Its’

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound – First It must be them.

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds – ‘Subjects’ must be Subject. And 'it' after the underline is singular and referring to plural 'patents' in the underline.

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound. - ‘Subjects’ must be Subject. And 'it' after the underline is singular and referring to plural 'patents' in the underline.
_________________

Hard-work, Perseverance and Commitment.....

Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1112
Location: India
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2015, 11:33
2
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

we are tested on grounds of pronouns and subject-verb concepts here majorly
Pronouns: them refer to both the genes
it refers to research subject

A is correct as it is

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
past tense verb had is wrong here since there are not two past events and everything is in present tense.
now is redundant and not necessary
it is used in non underlined portion of sentence to refer research subject so it cant be subjects

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound
itis referred to genes(Plural subject) and research(Singular subj) both so pronoun ambiguity is present in this sentence.

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds
subjects and now errors from other options repeat here
compound is changed to compounds changing the intended meaning

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound
subjects, compound and now errors from other options repeat here
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Oct 2015
Posts: 311
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 3.93
WE: Account Management (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2015, 02:21
1
thelosthippie wrote:
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound

resounding A!

thanks to veritas tips now i know that meaning matters in SC as much as grammar does.
"now" rules out B C D E because it changes the meaning to implying that previously they had not felt entitled. But that wasn't the matter in the sentence.
The matter or the meaning is "the extraction of some things by a group. consequently they want a copyright".. as in "having worked hard, you expect a reward". "now" even brings redundancy into it.
if the sentence was saying "the group never imagined patenting DNA but...", then "now" might make some sense.
Director
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 533
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2016, 23:46
2
Top Contributor
Make sure that you read the non-underlined portions too.

"but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature." - the 'it' refers to patent.

Also, note the usage of 'having extracted ..." - this denotes a previous action and applies to the subject of the main clause Myriad Genetics. This modifier is followed by an action that happens later.
for example - Having watched the movie, I had dinner. Two actions - watching the movie and having dinner. Watching the movie happened first. This action is followed by another action - having dinner.

B - "having had extracted" - the usage of past perfect is unnecessary.
"having extracted" already suggests that this action happened first.

C - "Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject" - this suggests that the company extracted genes to isolate human DNA. this is absurd.

D - "entitled to its patents" -its patents is plural. the 'it' in non-underlined portion cannot refer to patents.

E - "it" cannot refer to "patents".
_________________

Register for the Free GMAT Video Training Course : https://crackverbal.com/MBA-Through-GMAT-2019-Registration

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4629
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 09:36
Top Contributor
Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound

Pl. let me make a point. There is a rule that a pronoun when used in different places in one and the same sentence cannot refer to different antecedents.
Based on that let's now try to refer the -it- to the patent.

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feelsit the patent is entitled to its the patent's patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it the patent on the grounds that a company cannot copyright

Is this correct?. I feel that it refers to the MG rather the patent - let us try to replace it with MG

A. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as a research subject, Myriad Genetics feelsit MG is entitled to[ itsMG's patent on the new DNA compound, but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contestingit MG on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature.
It may be noted that from what it looks, the patent is yet to be granted and therefore one can't contest something before it has even been created. You can only contest the company or its feeling that it is entitled for something . So I feel A is somewhat cleaved . Secondly, if we refer it to the patent, then there should two patents for two different compounds, in which case, them should be used and not it.

B. Having had extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound --- had extracted is plain wrong

C. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound -- 1.There are two compounds. They cannot be referred by the singular "it" . 2.Use of it to refer to patent is problematic IMO

D. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels it is entitled to its patents on the new DNA compounds -- Actually, D and E are the same, except that E is a little more concise than D.

E. Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate them as research subjects, Myriad Genetics now feels entitled to its patents on the new DNA compound -- This is also good; the plurality of the newly extracted compounds is maintained, they are the theme of two different research projects and it is genuinely referring to MG wherever it appears.

But can we have two grammatically correct versions as contenders? E is preferable only by a whisker to D on concision.
_________________

you can know a lot about something but not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Current Student
Joined: 15 Feb 2016
Posts: 32
Schools: Booth PT '21 (A)
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
GMAT 2: 620 Q49 V21
GPA: 2.9
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 09:56
CrackVerbalGMAT wrote:
Make sure that you read the non-underlined portions too.

"but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature." - the 'it' refers to patent.

Also, note the usage of 'having extracted ..." - this denotes a previous action and applies to the subject of the main clause Myriad Genetics. This modifier is followed by an action that happens later.
for example - Having watched the movie, I had dinner. Two actions - watching the movie and having dinner. Watching the movie happened first. This action is followed by another action - having dinner.

B - "having had extracted" - the usage of past perfect is unnecessary.
"having extracted" already suggests that this action happened first.

C - "Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from human DNA to isolate it as a research subject" - this suggests that the company extracted genes to isolate human DNA. this is absurd.

D - "entitled to its patents" -its patents is plural. the 'it' in non-underlined portion cannot refer to patents.

E - "it" cannot refer to "patents".

I thought "it" in the dependent clause "but petitioners..." is a place holder not really meant anything. Like in "it" is raining.
Director
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 533
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 17:58
Top Contributor
1
daagh wrote:

Pl. let me make a point. There is a rule that a pronoun when used in different places in one and the same sentence cannot refer to different antecedents.
Based on that let's now try to refer the -it- to the patent.

Not necessarily true. look here -
It was only after Katharine Graham became publisher of The Washington Post in 1963 that it moved into the first rank of American newspapers, and it was under her command that the paper won high praise for its unrelenting reporting of the Watergate scandal.

The first and the third "it" are placeholders.
The second "it" refers to Washington Post.

The rule must read - a pronoun when used in different places in one and the same clause cannot refer to different antecedents. (Not sentence)

"but petitioners in a Supreme Court case are contesting it on the grounds that a company cannot copyright nature." - If you replace 'it' with MG then the sentence does not make a lot of sense.
They are contesting MG's Decision, not MG itself.

"Myriad Genetics feels it is entitled to its patent on the new DNA compound" - here "it" refers to MG but not in the next clause.
_________________

Register for the Free GMAT Video Training Course : https://crackverbal.com/MBA-Through-GMAT-2019-Registration

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4629
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2016, 07:20
Top Contributor
Anothergmater

I wouldn't dare say so categorically; after all, E says - its patents on the new DNA compound-- as if it is wanting two patents for one compound. On that score, D is better. In the exam, I would choose D.
_________________

you can know a lot about something but not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4629
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2016, 09:26
1
Top Contributor
1. I am afraid Placeholders come in on a different setting. After all, they are dummies and fillers and don't have anything to refer to as very often they begin a sentence. But in the BRCA case, is there a placeholder 'it'. Nope. So citing placeholders as referring to different pronouns is erroneous.

2. If the second clause, has a pronoun and if it is going to refer to a different noun, then that noun should be appearing the second clause. There is no such word as ' patent' in the second clause.

Quote:
The rule must read - a pronoun when used in different places in one and the same clause cannot refer to different antecedents. (Not sentence)

Here is a snippet Magoosh's Mike:

Quote:
The GMAT hates ambiguity on Sentence Correction. In any Sentence Correction question, the same pronoun must refer to the same antecedent. It is 100% unacceptable to have the same pronoun refer to two different antecedents: even if you think you can interpret from context the antecedent in each case, the grammar and syntax themselves must make all distinctions crystal clear. It’s not enough for logic to fill in the holes in grammar: in a well-constructed GMAT sentence, logic and grammar must say exactly the same thing. Anything less than that is unacceptable to the GMAT.

http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-pronoun-traps/

It may be noted that Mike doesn't even mention clauses or sentences. He categorically states " In any Sentence Correction question" and wah!!-look at the ferocity of his perception.

Now let us move on to an OG question .

Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.

(A) Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.
(B) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses.
(C) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, new small businesses are not subject to the same applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity as established big businesses.
(D) Because new small businesses are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to them in the same way as to established big businesses.
(E) New small businesses are not subject to the applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity in the same way as established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.

Quote:
OG Solution:

In A, the 'they' after because is ambiguous; it seems illogically to refer to Formulas because they and Formulas are each the grammatical subject of a clause and because the previous 'they' refers to Formulas.

In A and B, do not apply to... in the same way as they do to is wordy and awkward.

D, the best choice, says more concisely in the same way as to.

Also in B, because 'they' refers to formulas, the introductory clause states confusedly that the formulas are growing.

In C and E, subject to the [same] applicability of... is wordy, awkward, and imprecise; furthermore, are is preferable either before or after established big businesses to complete the comparison. Finally, the referent of 'they' is not immediately clear in E.

The question is a two part sentence. The ' they' in the first clause refers to formulas and the second 'they' that is in a different clause cannot refer to formulas. If the second 'they' is interpreted to mean to businesses, however, logical the reference might seem, still is a foul. This is what the OG's rule is .
_________________

you can know a lot about something but not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Director
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 533
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2016, 13:04
1
Top Contributor
daagh wrote:
1. I am afraid Placeholders come in on a different setting. After all, they are dummies and fillers and don't have anything to refer to as very often they begin a sentence. But in the BRCA case, is there a placeholder 'it'. Nope. So citing placeholders as referring to different pronouns is erroneous.

Not quite. Placeholders have to refer to something on the GMAT. (they generally refer to a that clause or an infinitive phrase)
Here -
It was only after Katharine Graham became publisher of The Washington Post in 1963 that it moved into the first rank of American newspapers, and it was under her command that the paper won high praise for its unrelenting reporting of the Watergate scandal.

The first "it" refers to the that clause - that it moved into the first rank of American newspapers
the second "it" refers to - The Washington Post
the third "it" refers to - that the paper won high praise for its ...
the fourth "it" (its) refers to - The Washington Post.

Another example from GMATPrep -
During the last interglacial period, the climate on the Earth was warmer than it is today, and the consequent melting of the polar ice caps caused the sea level to rise about 60 feet above its present height
The first "it" refers to climate on Earth
The second "it" refers to sea level.
_________________

Register for the Free GMAT Video Training Course : https://crackverbal.com/MBA-Through-GMAT-2019-Registration

Director
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 533
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Nov 2016, 00:57
Top Contributor
daagh wrote:

Now let us move on to an OG question .

Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.

(A) Formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.
(B) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to new small businesses in the same way as they do to established big businesses.
(C) Because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, new small businesses are not subject to the same applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity as established big businesses.
(D) Because new small businesses are growing and are seldom in equilibrium, formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity do not apply to them in the same way as to established big businesses.
(E) New small businesses are not subject to the applicability of formulas for cash flow and the ratio of debt to equity in the same way as established big businesses, because they are growing and are seldom in equilibrium.

This seems to be an old question from OG 10. Pronoun Ambiguity is no longer tested on the GMAT.
Even if you consider pronoun ambiguity, the 'they' is ambiguous because it can refer either to 'established big businesses' or 'new small businesses'. It is not necessary that 'they' has to refer to formulas.
You cannot analyze a sentence purely from a grammatical point of view. The sentence has to make logical sense. Substituting 'formulas' for 'they' does not make much sense.
_________________

Register for the Free GMAT Video Training Course : https://crackverbal.com/MBA-Through-GMAT-2019-Registration

Re: Having extracted the BRCA1 and BRCA2 &nbs [#permalink] 27 Nov 2016, 00:57

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by