|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 1612
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
 24 Sep 2017, 04:42
mikemcgarry wrote: Mo2men wrote: Hi Mike, The article is full of tricky examples.  I have question about the phrase 'his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation'. I know that 'his' refer to 'Zhuangzi' but the name itself 'Zhuangzi' is mentioned in possessive form. I mean to use 'his', it should mention Zhuangzi clearly to be a correct reference. Do I miss something? Can you you help? Dear Mo2men, Great question, my friend! I am happy to help!  This is a very tricky rule about pronouns and their antecedents. In general, a noun in the possessive cannot be the antecedent of a pronoun, but the exception is that an noun in the possessive can be the antecedent of a possessive pronoun. e.g. Mozart's piano concerti are performed more frequently than his wind concerti." That's what's going on with Zhuanghi's name in (D). Does this make sense? Mike Dear Mike, I have some confusion about role mentioned above and the following: In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks Is the above construction acceptable in GMAT? does 'her party' refer to Alison's party' correctly? Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4675
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2017, 14:13
Mo2men wrote: Dear Mike,
I have some confusion about role mentioned above and the following:
In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks
Is the above construction acceptable in GMAT? does 'her party' refer to Alison's party' correctly?
Thanks in advance Dear Mo2men, I'm happy to respond. How are you, my friend? Your example sentence: In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks. In this sentence, the placement of the pronoun is not only 100% correct but quite sophisticated. This is one of the many rhetorical devices that writers use to build tension in a sentence. The reader reads " In her birthday party . . ." and immediately wonders, " who?" This curiosity can drive the reader with curiosity to read the rest of the sentence. Skilled writers don't just want to dump information on the reader: they want to create structures that produce a sort of "intellectual current" that impels the reader through their work. This is one simple example. Obviously, with story-book topic about a child's birthday party is not that intellectually enthralling, but we could imagine more dramatic academic or historical use. Before she traveled around the world in just 72 days in 1889-1890, . . .
After he conquered China, becoming its first non-native emperor, . . .
Though his last novel has be called both a "masterpiece" and "unreadable," . . . In all three cases, the "antecedent" of the pronoun would follow the comma, coming long after the mention of the pronoun itself. In all three cases, as I think you will agree, the unidentified pronoun generates a certain curiosity that would compel the read to read the rest of the sentence. Does this make sense? Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 1612
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2017, 14:20
mikemcgarry wrote: Mo2men wrote: Dear Mike,
I have some confusion about role mentioned above and the following:
In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks
Is the above construction acceptable in GMAT? does 'her party' refer to Alison's party' correctly?
Thanks in advance Dear Mo2men, I'm happy to respond. How are you, my friend? Your example sentence: In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks. In this sentence, the placement of the pronoun is not only 100% correct but quite sophisticated. This is one of the many rhetorical devices that writers use to build tension in a sentence. The reader reads " In her birthday party . . ." and immediately wonders, " who?" This curiosity can drive the reader with curiosity to read the rest of the sentence. Skilled writers don't just want to dump information on the reader: they want to create structures that produce a sort of "intellectual current" that impels the reader through their work. This is one simple example. Obviously, with story-book topic about a child's birthday party is not that intellectually enthralling, but we could imagine more dramatic academic or historical use. Before she traveled around the world in just 72 days in 1889-1890, . . .
After he conquered China, becoming its first non-native emperor, . . .
Though his last novel has be called both a "masterpiece" and "unreadable," . . . In all three cases, the "antecedent" of the pronoun would follow the comma, coming long after the mention of the pronoun itself. In all three cases, as I think you will agree, the unidentified pronoun generates a certain curiosity that would compel the read to read the rest of the sentence. Does this make sense? Mike Thanks Mike. I do share the curiosity when it is written in such a style.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Posts: 776
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
28 Sep 2017, 04:19
mikemcgarry wrote: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary.
(A) Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, but in terms of a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization this was not as influential as the interpretation of Confucianism of Mengzi, who was his contemporary
(B) Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism had a lasting impact on the course of Chinese civilization, whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not do this
(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential
(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
(E) In terms of lasting impact, Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism influenced Chinese civilization more than the highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism by Mengzi’s contemporary ZhuangziThis is a very complicated comparison SC question, the sort that the GMAT might give you. How does one approach such questions? For three more questions of this sort, as well as the OE for this question, see: Challenging Comparison Questions on the GMATMike This is very complicated; the thing about D is that is succinctly expresses the idea. The modifier in C can be done away though the way D is written may sound wrong to a native's ear. D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 33
|
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
28 Sep 2017, 13:15
(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential
Compare "people" to "this interpretation" - NOPE
(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
Correctly compare Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism to Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 214
Location: India
GPA: 3.54
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Oct 2017, 20:35
mikemcgarry wrote: sarathgopinath wrote: Hi mikemcgarry
I eliminated this option because of this part of the option which states 'whereas his contemporary Zhuangzi’s interpretation'
It would be illogical to say that his contemporary is Zhuangzi's interpretation.
This was my line of reasoning.
Could you tell me if I'm right? Dear sarathgopinath, My friend, see my post in this thread from yesterday, in which I just discussed this very issue. My friend, part of due diligence involves reading everything in the thread, so you know whether what you want to ask has already been discussed. This is best way to show that respect the time and the energy of the experts on this site. Does all this make sense? Mike Hi Mike, Can you please elaborate on the use of had in option D. On one side we have didnot have, whereas on the other side we are using had D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism I thought that option D would be correct if the sentence were written down in either of the below two formats- 1) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism did 2) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as did his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4675
|
Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Oct 2017, 09:51
sunny91 wrote: Hi Mike,
Can you please elaborate on the use of had in option D. On one side we have didnot have, whereas on the other side we are using had
D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
I thought that option D would be correct if the sentence were written down in either of the below two formats-
1) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism did
2) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as did his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism Dear sunny91, A great question, my friend! I'm happy to respond. There are two issues here. The first is the placement of the verb: at the beginning, as in your (1), or at the end, as in your (2). Here's what I'll say. Version #1 is not wrong, but it's simplistic. Among native speakers, it's how we would expect a child or a relatively unsophisticated writer to phrase the information. Version #2 is inherently more sophisticated and elegant: putting the verb at the beginning has that spark the connotes an intelligent and sophisticated writer. Many many OAs on the GMAT SC have a similar spark to them. Given that we are going to put the verb at the beginning, what verb to we use? Again, it's not wrong to use " did," but it's less desirable. The forms of the verb " to do" are the generic substitution for any verb, and it's certainly appropriate if there's a long or complicated predicate. See: Repeating Verb Phrases on the GMATThus, we always could use the generic substitute verb, but when we can, it's more elegant, a tighter and more unified sentence, to use the real verb, and if the real verb is just as short, then there's something almost jarring about using the substitute verb " to do" rather than the real verb. Here, the real verb is " had," the opposite of " did not have." These are the positive & negative of the ordinary past tense. I had an ice cream cone. My friend did not have one.
My friend had a dog when she was growing up, but I did not have one.
Coleridge had classical education, but Blake did not have such a background. The opposite of " A did not have X" is simply " A had X." Those two forms imply each other, especially in a statement of contrast. And, again, it's much better to use the real verb, the contextual verb, rather than the generic substitute " did." Using the verb from in context helps to unify the sentence and give it coherences--also sparks that connote an intelligent and perceptive writer. Does all this make sense? Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 214
Location: India
GPA: 3.54
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative, [#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Oct 2017, 10:16
mikemcgarry wrote: sunny91 wrote: Hi Mike,
Can you please elaborate on the use of had in option D. On one side we have didnot have, whereas on the other side we are using had
D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism
I thought that option D would be correct if the sentence were written down in either of the below two formats-
1) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism did
2) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as did his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism Dear sunny91, A great question, my friend! I'm happy to respond. There are two issues here. The first is the placement of the verb: at the beginning, as in your (1), or at the end, as in your (2). Here's what I'll say. Version #1 is not wrong, but it's simplistic. Among native speakers, it's how we would expect a child or a relatively unsophisticated writer to phrase the information. Version #2 is inherently more sophisticated and elegant: putting the verb at the beginning has that spark the connotes an intelligent and sophisticated writer. Many many OAs on the GMAT SC have a similar spark to them. Given that we are going to put the verb at the beginning, what verb to we use? Again, it's not wrong to use " did," but it's less desirable. The forms of the verb " to do" are the generic substitution for any verb, and it's certainly appropriate if there's a long or complicated predicate. See: Repeating Verb Phrases on the GMATThus, we always could use the generic substitute verb, but when we can, it's more elegant, a tighter and more unified sentence, to use the real verb, and if the real verb is just as short, then there's something almost jarring about using the substitute verb " to do" rather than the real verb. Here, the real verb is " had," the opposite of " did not have." These are the positive & negative of the ordinary past tense. I had an ice cream cone. My friend did not have one.
My friend had a dog when she was growing up, but I did not have one.
Coleridge had classical education, but Blake did not have such a background. The opposite of " A did not have X" is simply " A had X." Those two forms imply each other, especially in a statement of contrast. And, again, it's much better to use the real verb, the contextual verb, rather than the generic substitute " did." Using the verb from in context helps to unify the sentence and give it coherences--also sparks that connote an intelligent and perceptive writer. Does all this make sense? Mike Thanks Mike. The examples u provided really help me in understanding the construction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Zhuangzi had an interpretation of Daoism that was highly imaginative,
[#permalink]
24 Oct 2017, 10:16
|
|
|
|
|
Go to page
Previous
1 2
[ 28 posts ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
