Bunuel wrote:
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University, Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty” as the amount by which a woman’s earning falls behind those of men after having children.
A. University, Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”
B. University, Camille Sogaard from the LSB, Jakob Kleven from the LSB were the authors of a study conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income defining “child penalty”
C. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”
D. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, were the authors of a study on “child penalty”, conducted the study to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, and defined it
E. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study on “child penalty” conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defining it
Hello Everyone!
Let's tackle this question, one issue at a time, to narrow it down to the right choice! To start, here is the original question with any major differences highlighted in
orange:
Henrik Landais from the Princeton
University, Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty” as the amount by which a woman’s earning falls behind those of men after having children.
A.
University, Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study
conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income,
defined “child penalty”
B.
University, Camille Sogaard from the LSB, Jakob Kleven from the LSB were the authors of a study
conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income
defining “child penalty”
C.
University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study
conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income,
defined “child penalty”
D.
University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, were the authors of a study on “child penalty”,
conducted the study to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, and
defined it
E.
University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study on “child penalty”
conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income,
defining it
After a quick glance over the options, we have a few places to focus on:
1. How each option tackles the list of authors
2. conducting vs. conducted (Verb Tense/Idioms)
3. defining vs. defined (Verb Tense/Fragments)Let's start with #1 on our list: how to tackle the list of authors. While we have 3 names listed here, they are actually split into only 2 parts:
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University
&
Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSBWhile it may be your initial assumption that you need to separate all 3 names, you don't! Remember - we're only dealing with 2 list items here. So let's see which options keep both items grouped together properly and using parallel structure. To make this easier to spot, I'll add in the first part of the list.
A.
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University, Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”
This doesn't work because the comma actually makes it ambiguous whether Camille belongs to Princeton or the LSB! So let's rule this one out!
B.
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University, Camille Sogaard from the LSB, Jakob Kleven from the LSB were the authors of a study conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income defining “child penalty”
This also doesn't work, but for a couple different reasons. First, you don't need to repeat "from the LSB" for both people - we'll see below a better way to do that. Second, when listing 3+ items, the last one needs the word "and" before the last item in the list - and this one doesn't have it!
C.
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”
This is okay for now! It's clear which people belong to which school, and the two list items are connected with "and," which is how they should be connected.
D.
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, were the authors of a study on “child penalty”, conducted the study to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, and defined it
This one is also okay for now! It's clear which people belong to which school, and the two list items are connected with "and," which is how they should be connected.
E.
Henrik Landais from the Princeton University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study on “child penalty” conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defining it
This one is also okay for now! It's clear which people belong to which school, and the two list items are connected with "and," which is how they should be connected.
We can eliminate options A & B because they don't list the authors correctly.Now that we have it narrowed down to 3 options, let's tackle #2 on our list: conducted vs. conducting. We need to make sure that the verb is used correctly in each case, and that it doesn't muddle meaning:
C. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study
conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”
This is
OKAY for now. The verb "conducted" is used correctly here to show past tense and provides clear meaning.
D. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, were the authors of a study on “child penalty”,
conducted the study to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, and defined it
This is also
OKAY for now. The verb "conducted" is in past tense and clearly attributed to the authors!
E. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study on “child penalty”
conducting to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defining it
This is
INCORRECT because "conducting" is actually turned into an action verb here, and it doesn't make sense who/what is doing the "conducting" here. The way this is written, it is actually saying the study is conducting itself - and that doesn't work!
We can eliminate option E because the verb "conducting" isn't what we need here.Now that we have it narrowed down to only 2 options, let's take a closer look at each one to find any problems:
C. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, the authors of a study conducted to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, defined “child penalty”This is
CORRECT! It's clear that the authors belong to 2 different schools, and it's also clear that the term "child penalty" is what the authors defined.
D. University and Camille Sogaard and Jakob Kleven from the LSB, were the authors of a study on “child penalty”, conducted the study to understand the factors that determine the impact of having children on women’s income, and defined itThis is
INCORRECT because we're actually dealing with a vague pronoun! We aren't clear what "it" is referring to! If we go with what's closest to the pronoun, it would refer to "the impact of having children on women's income," which isn't the term the authors are hoping to define. They are trying to define "child penalty." It's also not grammatically correct to put the comma before "were" in this sentence either, so let's toss out this option.
There you have it - option C is the correct choice! A long-winded sentence like this one, with all of its complicated parts, can be intimidating to find on the GMAT. However, if you stick to your training and focus only on key differences, you can tackle them much quicker - and more successfully!
Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.