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

 It is currently 15 Aug 2018, 00:03

### 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

# Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 182
Location: United States
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT Date: 10-16-2013
GPA: 3
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2014, 09:05
2
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

E-gmat gave a great explanation of the problem and I am posting in here.

This is a very good advanced level question. It tests your understanding of modifiers and pronouns. It also tests your understanding of the intended meaning of the sentence.

Since most of you were able to eliminate choices A and D, I will concentrate on Choices B, C, and E.

Lets begin the solution:
Step 1 - Read the original sentence and understand the meaning.

Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worried well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

(Note that even though you were all able to eliminate choice A, we still need to review this choice to understand the meaning that the correct choice is intended to communicate).

1. Sentence talks about an executive who is heavily committed to a course of action
2. This course of action has worked well in the past
3. Because of this heavy commitment, the executive is likely to miss the signs of trouble when they appear.
Step 2 - We will understand the errors in this sentence:

Pronoun Error - ..makes it likely to…- “IT” has no clear antecedent. The sentence must specify clearly that executive is likely to miss the signs…
Thus, choice A is eliminated

Step 3 - Process of Elimination or Choice Analysis

Choice B
An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

This choice changes the intended meaning of the sentence. Here is what this sentence communicates:
1. Executive is heavily committed to a course of action - Same as Intended Meaning
2. Executive makes missing signs of trouble likely - Different from Intended Meaning
Thus, choice B states that executives makes the missing of signs likely, whereas, the intended meaning is that the heavy commitment to the course of action makes missing signs likely.

Choice C

An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
This choice does not distort the original meaning of the sentence. However, from this sentence it is not clear as to what has worked well in the past. Thus, this sentence has pronoun reference error for “it”

Choice E

Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
This choice maintains the intended meaning:
1. Action of being heavily committed to a course of action causes the effect.
2. The effect is that the executive misses signs of trouble
Note here that the phrase “being heavily committed to a course of action” is the subject for the verb “is”.

Let me know if this makes sense to you.

Also, I would like to say that please do not reject a choice just because it has the word “being”. You must do a careful analysis of each choice and pick the choice that communicates the intended meaning without any grammatical errors.

For e-GMAT Users, all Sentence Correction questions are solved using a step by step process. These solutions can be found in the 9 Application Files and UGE. (Total of 150+ questions)
_________________

Kudos me if you like my post !!!!

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 268
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2014, 19:32
akhil911 wrote:
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

E-gmat gave a great explanation of the problem and I am posting in here.

This is a very good advanced level question. It tests your understanding of modifiers and pronouns. It also tests your understanding of the intended meaning of the sentence.

Since most of you were able to eliminate choices A and D, I will concentrate on Choices B, C, and E.

Lets begin the solution:
Step 1 - Read the original sentence and understand the meaning.

Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worried well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

(Note that even though you were all able to eliminate choice A, we still need to review this choice to understand the meaning that the correct choice is intended to communicate).

1. Sentence talks about an executive who is heavily committed to a course of action
2. This course of action has worked well in the past
3. Because of this heavy commitment, the executive is likely to miss the signs of trouble when they appear.
Step 2 - We will understand the errors in this sentence:

Pronoun Error - ..makes it likely to…- “IT” has no clear antecedent. The sentence must specify clearly that executive is likely to miss the signs…
Thus, choice A is eliminated

Step 3 - Process of Elimination or Choice Analysis

Choice B
An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

This choice changes the intended meaning of the sentence. Here is what this sentence communicates:
1. Executive is heavily committed to a course of action - Same as Intended Meaning
2. Executive makes missing signs of trouble likely - Different from Intended Meaning
Thus, choice B states that executives makes the missing of signs likely, whereas, the intended meaning is that the heavy commitment to the course of action makes missing signs likely.

Choice C

An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
This choice does not distort the original meaning of the sentence. However, from this sentence it is not clear as to what has worked well in the past. Thus, this sentence has pronoun reference error for “it”

Choice E

Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
This choice maintains the intended meaning:
1. Action of being heavily committed to a course of action causes the effect.
2. The effect is that the executive misses signs of trouble
Note here that the phrase “being heavily committed to a course of action” is the subject for the verb “is”.

Let me know if this makes sense to you.

Also, I would like to say that please do not reject a choice just because it has the word “being”. You must do a careful analysis of each choice and pick the choice that communicates the intended meaning without any grammatical errors.

For e-GMAT Users, all Sentence Correction questions are solved using a step by step process. These solutions can be found in the 9 Application Files and UGE. (Total of 150+ questions)

Hi,

My question with "e" is the "being" part. How can you tell that it's the subject and not just a modifier for "executive". I took it as the latter and realized that "being" cannot be used to express identity, hence the conflict. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!
Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2013
Posts: 158
Schools: LBS '18
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
WE: Design (Transportation)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2014, 19:49
akhil911 wrote:
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

E-gmat gave a great explanation of the problem and I am posting in here.

This is a very good advanced level question. It tests your understanding of modifiers and pronouns. It also tests your understanding of the intended meaning of the sentence.

Since most of you were able to eliminate choices A and D, I will concentrate on Choices B, C, and E.

Lets begin the solution:
Step 1 - Read the original sentence and understand the meaning.

Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worried well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

(Note that even though you were all able to eliminate choice A, we still need to review this choice to understand the meaning that the correct choice is intended to communicate).

1. Sentence talks about an executive who is heavily committed to a course of action
2. This course of action has worked well in the past
3. Because of this heavy commitment, the executive is likely to miss the signs of trouble when they appear.
Step 2 - We will understand the errors in this sentence:

Pronoun Error - ..makes it likely to…- “IT” has no clear antecedent. The sentence must specify clearly that executive is likely to miss the signs…
Thus, choice A is eliminated

Step 3 - Process of Elimination or Choice Analysis

Choice B
An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

This choice changes the intended meaning of the sentence. Here is what this sentence communicates:
1. Executive is heavily committed to a course of action - Same as Intended Meaning
2. Executive makes missing signs of trouble likely - Different from Intended Meaning
Thus, choice B states that executives makes the missing of signs likely, whereas, the intended meaning is that the heavy commitment to the course of action makes missing signs likely.

Choice C

An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
This choice does not distort the original meaning of the sentence. However, from this sentence it is not clear as to what has worked well in the past. Thus, this sentence has pronoun reference error for “it”

Choice E

Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
This choice maintains the intended meaning:
1. Action of being heavily committed to a course of action causes the effect.
2. The effect is that the executive misses signs of trouble
Note here that the phrase “being heavily committed to a course of action” is the subject for the verb “is”.

Let me know if this makes sense to you.

Also, I would like to say that please do not reject a choice just because it has the word “being”. You must do a careful analysis of each choice and pick the choice that communicates the intended meaning without any grammatical errors.

For e-GMAT Users, all Sentence Correction questions are solved using a step by step process. These solutions can be found in the 9 Application Files and UGE. (Total of 150+ questions)

What else could 'it' refer to, other than 'action'?
Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 561
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 29 Mar 2015, 12:24
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,(WARM UP)especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear. --> 1st "it" in especially if it has .... correct, it refers to a course of action. 2nd "it" in makes it likely to miss is WRONG -> accrording to the meaning, this part should refer to an executive - it can not be the pronoun in this case (ref. a person). The Correct structure could be --> it makes HIM likely to...

B. An executive (WARM UP)who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear. --> An executive doesn't make signs likely... a heavy commitment to a course of action makes it.

C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past. --> Antecedent of IT ? Not clear, this senntence is just placed wrongly, it should give additional Information about a course of action, but in this case it fails to do so, bacause of the wrong placement.

D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear. --> possessives are adjectives, not nouns, so executives' is not an appropriate antecedent for a pronoun.

E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

By POE - E must be the correct answer. By the way, Being heavily committed to a course of action is a SUBJECT of the verb IS -and NOT as a MODIFIER - one of the wrong cases, in wich wi can eliminate answer choices with "BEING".
Being is used here jus as in this sentence --> Having good friends is important for me.

_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Originally posted by BrainLab on 29 Mar 2015, 06:52.
Last edited by BrainLab on 29 Mar 2015, 12:24, edited 2 times in total.
Director
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 560
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Mar 2015, 07:01
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

Option E is the best answer choice here .
the use of being is perfectly fine here as it is used a noun here .
_________________

Thanks,
Lucky

_______________________________________________________
Kindly press the to appreciate my post !!

Manager
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 62
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2015, 02:50
Yes. Choice E looks the best here!
_________________

Kudos would be appreciated -:) !

http://www.EnglishForEveryone.in

GMAT Prep : Critical Reasoning Decoded

Manager
Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Posts: 60
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Apr 2015, 13:07
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

A.Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

Usage of second "it" is not required

B.An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

Usage of Makes missing signs is wordy

C.An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.

Usage of "it" is not required.

D.Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.

Usage of "them" is not required

E.Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Correct

Hence E
Ans

Regards
SG
MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 5124
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 May 2015, 09:33
1
19

The Official Guide for GMAT Review 2017

Practice Question
Question No.: SC 776
Page: 704

Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.

C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.

D. Executives’ being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.

E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
_________________
Manager
Status: Perspiring
Joined: 15 Feb 2012
Posts: 106
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
GPA: 3.6
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 May 2015, 00:24
2
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Unclear whether 'It' refers to Commitment or Action
Also doesn't mention who is likely to miss signs.

B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
Ambiguous & change of menaing conveyed by original sentence

C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
Unclear whether 'It' refers to Trouble or Action

D. Executives’ being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
Incorrect construction

E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2014
Posts: 96
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Aug 2015, 12:56
Good explanation from e-gmat. Indeed a tough one !
Current Student
Joined: 06 Jun 2015
Posts: 37
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V37
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2015, 15:53
Well C is wrong basically because the modifier especially if it has worked well in the past has been placed far away from the entity it modifies, course of action and it can have two logical antecedents, 'trouble' and 'action' and its not clear as to which one is 'it' referring to.
Manager
Joined: 15 Feb 2015
Posts: 109
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2015, 23:30
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of
action, especially if it has worked well in the past,
makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or
misinterpret them when they do appear.

(A) Heavy commitment by an executive to a course
of action, especially if it has worked well in the
past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient
trouble or misinterpret them when they do
appear.
(B) An executive who is heavily committed to a
course of action, especially one that worked well
in the past, makes missing signs of incipient
trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they
do appear.
(C) An executive who is heavily committed to a
course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret
signs of incipient trouble when they do appear,
especially if it has worked well in the past.
(D) Executives’ being heavily committed to a course
of action, especially if it has worked well in the
past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient
trouble or misinterpreting them when they do
appear.
(E) Being heavily committed to a course of action,
especially one that has worked well in the past,
is likely to make an executive miss signs of
incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they
do appear.
Intern
Joined: 24 Aug 2015
Posts: 3
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2015, 05:03
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

"Being heavily committed to a course of action", ..........fluff.................., is likely to make an.................
just like

"Swimming daily",.......fluff............., is likely to make a person fit or .....
_________________

Intern
Status: Don't Give Up!
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 34
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT Date: 04-25-2015
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2015, 06:02
marine wrote:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.

In this...we have two antecedents for first "IT" but egmat solution does not point this error. Please somebody explain.
_________________

- Sachin

-If you like my explanation then please click "Kudos"

Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 794
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2015, 08:37
sach24x7 wrote:

In this...we have two antecedents for first "IT" but egmat solution does not point this error. Please somebody explain.

On the GMAT these days you may seen problems that have ambiguous antecedents (i.e. multiple potential antecedents). What the GMAT does consistently point to as an error is when the antecedent shifts within the sentence.

Example: I lost my bike this morning but I later found it, but it made me late for work.
Here the first "it" relates to my bike, but the second "it" is a generalization for losing my bike, not the bike itself. That shifting is incorrect on the GMAT.

KW
_________________

Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

Manager
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 151
GPA: 3.72
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2016, 13:31
Good point, but I have two doubts -
1- "signs of incipient trouble" is similar to "flowers of rose" and we can not refer this phrase (flowers of rose) with "it" - similarly, can we refer "trouble" with "it"??
2- What function " miss signs of incipient trouble" serves in the correct answer option - Adjective or Adverb? And what does this phrase modify or limit?

KyleWiddison wrote:
sach24x7 wrote:

In this...we have two antecedents for first "IT" but egmat solution does not point this error. Please somebody explain.

On the GMAT these days you may seen problems that have ambiguous antecedents (i.e. multiple potential antecedents). What the GMAT does consistently point to as an error is when the antecedent shifts within the sentence.

Example: I lost my bike this morning but I later found it, but it made me late for work.
Here the first "it" relates to my bike, but the second "it" is a generalization for losing my bike, not the bike itself. That shifting is incorrect on the GMAT.

KW

_________________

A lot needs to be learned from all of you.

Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Apr 2016, 06:50
DAakash7 wrote:
Good point, but I have two doubts -
1- "signs of incipient trouble" is similar to "flowers of rose" and we can not refer this phrase (flowers of rose) with "it" - similarly, can we refer "trouble" with "it"??
2- What function " miss signs of incipient trouble" serves in the correct answer option - Adjective or Adverb? And what does this phrase modify or limit?

KyleWiddison wrote:
sach24x7 wrote:

In this...we have two antecedents for first "IT" but egmat solution does not point this error. Please somebody explain.

On the GMAT these days you may seen problems that have ambiguous antecedents (i.e. multiple potential antecedents). What the GMAT does consistently point to as an error is when the antecedent shifts within the sentence.

Example: I lost my bike this morning but I later found it, but it made me late for work.
Here the first "it" relates to my bike, but the second "it" is a generalization for losing my bike, not the bike itself. That shifting is incorrect on the GMAT.

KW

Following is my response to your question 2:

The phrase " miss signs of incipient trouble" functions somewhat similar to that of direct object of a verb (in this case the verb "make") rather than that of an adverb modifying the verb. "An executive" is the indirect object for the verb.

Compare with the following example:

him = indirect object
president = direct object.

Could you please elaborate further on your query 1 ? The pronoun "it" can refer to "trouble", but not "signs of trouble", since the latter is plural.
Manager
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 151
GPA: 3.72
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Apr 2016, 07:15
Thanks for asnwering my queries Sayantan; however, I have a follow-up question -

1- Clarification of the first query -
Can a Pronoun refer to a Noun that is a part of a prepositional phrase that acts as an Adjective?

Official example -
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Choice C -
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.

Official explanation of answer choice C - "The reference of preposition 'it' is unclear because many nouns have intervened between the appearance of the logical referent(course of action) and 'it' ".

My Doubt - How "it" can refer to "trouble" because "trouble" is a part of a prepositional phrase whose "head" is "signs". And, if "it" can not refer to "trouble", then there is no ambiguity. Why official explanation describes this usage as ambiguous?

2- The direct object of a verb is mostly a Noun phrase, but the phrase " miss signs of incipient trouble" doesn't seem a Noun phrase to me. Could you please help me understand this usage.

sayantanc2k wrote:
DAakash7 wrote:
Good point, but I have two doubts -
1- "signs of incipient trouble" is similar to "flowers of rose" and we can not refer this phrase (flowers of rose) with "it" - similarly, can we refer "trouble" with "it"??
2- What function " miss signs of incipient trouble" serves in the correct answer option - Adjective or Adverb? And what does this phrase modify or limit?

Following is my response to your question 2:

The phrase " miss signs of incipient trouble" functions somewhat similar to that of direct object of a verb (in this case the verb "make") rather than that of an adverb modifying the verb. "An executive" is the indirect object for the verb.

Compare with the following example:

him = indirect object
president = direct object.

Could you please elaborate further on your query 1 ? The pronoun "it" can refer to "trouble", but not "signs of trouble", since the latter is plural.

_________________

A lot needs to be learned from all of you.

Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Apr 2016, 11:26
Query 1:
There isn't probably any official rule that an object of preposition cannot be referred to by a pronoun. Rather I would cite an example in the contrary:

I was sitting on the top of the table before it broke.

I do not see any problem with the above example in which the pronoun ( blue font) refers to a noun within a prepositional phrase.

(From the official explanation, it can be concluded that GMAT allows the use of pronoun to refer to a noun within a prepositional phrase.)

Query 2:
In option E, "miss" is a verbal and the closest verbal that I can think of is an infinitive. In my opinion this phrase "miss signs of incipient trouble" comes closest to a nominal infinitive phrase used as an object.

DAakash7 wrote:
Thanks for asnwering my queries Sayantan; however, I have a follow-up question -

1- Clarification of the first query -
Can a Pronoun refer to a Noun that is a part of a prepositional phrase that acts as an Adjective?

Official example -
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
Choice C -
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.

Official explanation of answer choice C - "The reference of preposition 'it' is unclear because many nouns have intervened between the appearance of the logical referent(course of action) and 'it' ".

My Doubt - How "it" can refer to "trouble" because "trouble" is a part of a prepositional phrase whose "head" is "signs". And, if "it" can not refer to "trouble", then there is no ambiguity. Why official explanation describes this usage as ambiguous?

2- The direct object of a verb is mostly a Noun phrase, but the phrase " miss signs of incipient trouble" doesn't seem a Noun phrase to me. Could you please help me understand this usage.

sayantanc2k wrote:
DAakash7 wrote:
Good point, but I have two doubts -
1- "signs of incipient trouble" is similar to "flowers of rose" and we can not refer this phrase (flowers of rose) with "it" - similarly, can we refer "trouble" with "it"??
2- What function " miss signs of incipient trouble" serves in the correct answer option - Adjective or Adverb? And what does this phrase modify or limit?

Following is my response to your question 2:

The phrase " miss signs of incipient trouble" functions somewhat similar to that of direct object of a verb (in this case the verb "make") rather than that of an adverb modifying the verb. "An executive" is the indirect object for the verb.

Compare with the following example:

him = indirect object
president = direct object.

Could you please elaborate further on your query 1 ? The pronoun "it" can refer to "trouble", but not "signs of trouble", since the latter is plural.
Intern
Joined: 03 May 2015
Posts: 5
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2016, 11:51
In option C, why the use of "it" is incorrect. Course of action is the only logical antecedent to it, replacing it with trouble does not makes sense.
Re: Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, &nbs [#permalink] 12 May 2016, 11:51

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9    Next  [ 174 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.