In 1719 the Meissen manufacturers found a way of combining kaolin

Question

In 1719 the Meissen manufacturers found a way of combining kaolin, quartz, and feldspar, a kind of potash, to manufacture a hard-paste porcelain,  which was comparable to what was being imported by Europeans from the Far East for centuries .

(A) which was comparable to what was being imported by Europeans from the Far East for centuries

(B) which compared with that which Europeans imported from the Far East for centuries

(C) comparable with what Europeans imported from the Far East for centuries

(D) comparable to what Europeans had imported for centuries from the Far East

(E) that could be compared to what Europeans imported for centuries from the Far East

https://www.nytimes.com/1982/07/10/business/east-germany-s-profitable-porcelain.html

Meissen has claimed to be the birthplace of European porcelain since Johann Friedrich Bottger, a former pharmacist's apprentice and sometime alchemist whose 300th birthday Meissen celebrates this year, found a way in 1719 to combine kaolin, quartz and feldspar, a kind of potash, to manufacture hard-paste porcelain  comparable to what Europeans had imported for centuries  from the Far East.

Saurajm · Answer

Hi, why A is incorrect? It sounds more logical to me....on the contrary in answer D seems that we are comparing the WAY found by manufactures, instead of comparing the hard-paste porcelain. 
Thanks

gvij2017 · Answer

Is underline portion cover ", comparable " or not? If yes, D is correct, otherwise, D is wrong.

Where am I wrong?

daagh · Answer

Soujam wrote

'Comparable' cannot modify the way, either grammatically or logically. 
 
1. 'Comparable', an adjective, has to modify the noun that it touches and if not appropriate, the nearest another noun. 
It might be seen there are at least four other nouns before it can touch the way.
 
2. Logically, we can see that the importers bought a product, not a process before they made the invention.

The only problem with D is that the choice unnecessarily drops the phrase from the Far East, something people may object as not carrying the original intent in full. However, many others may argue that the Far East or the Far West is not the critical issue as long as that the importing was the fact rather than from where.

With regard to the justification of past perfect, the related later event is that the people found something in 1719. It is clear that before this invention, people had imported it. Therefore, it is passable to use a past perfect, as it is neither unidiomatic nor ungrammatical. By using the word 'had'' we are only adding to the clarity.

In addition, look at the word 'for centuries.' The preposition 'for' is a perfect tense marker of both present perfect and past perfect tenses.

Ans: The underlining starts even before that in the prompt and includes 'which was". Therefore, it definitely covers comparable.

daagh · Answer

A solid reason to eliminate A?

Perhaps it is not grammar but the style I suppose. First, the phrase 'which was' is superfluous. It adds to the verbiage

Second, the passive could have been avoided, as there is a more dynamic active voice in Choice D.

Third, the word 'for centuries' gives an edge to D over A, as one can now use past perfect without hesitation, making things more clear.

ravigupta2912 · Answer

Do we not need a relative pronoun here after porcelain? I wanted to go for D, but the presence of comma and lack of relative pronoun made me go for A.

Please help me understand how to differentiate between a modifier and a clause that may need a relative pronoun.

DmitryFarber · Answer

ravigupta2912
There are no simple, fixed rules about when to include a relative pronoun at the front of a modifier. The GMAT will often omit them, but if you have a choice between an answer with or without that relative pronoun, something else needs to be at issue. In this case, it's the use of time. "Was being" implies a current action, while "for centuries" implies a past perfect action. Compare what you'd say in the present:

This valley is widening.
This valley has been widening for centuries.

We can't say "This valley is widening for centuries."

For another case of "they cut the relative pronoun and folks aren't happy about it," look here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-first-tr ... 25551.html

tirthshah2013 · Answer

I cannot understand why we can't select E as an option. I was confused between D and E. Is it because we used the simple past tense in option E 'exported'? Or is there any other reason too?

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Hello  tirthshah2013 ,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, in addition to the tense error you have described, Option E also incorrectly uses the construction "comma + that" to refer to additional information; remember, “that” is used to provide information needed to preserve the core meaning of the sentence, and the “comma + which” construction is used to provide extra information.

To understand the concept of "Which" verus "That" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0KPtU5zQus

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

DmitryFarber · Answer

tirthshah2013

As ExpertsGlobal5 stated, we don't want to use "comma + THAT." However, there's also a meaning problem with E. The problem is that the word "comparable," which appears in the correct answers, does not mean "able to be compared." It actually means "similar." So E relies on a misinterpretation of the intended meaning, and one that doesn't make sense on its own--anything *can* be compared. We only care if the comparison reveals a similar level of quality or usefulness.

hdsinghdang · Answer

Hi Team,

I can't seem to narrow down why "which" is wrong here. While I selected A as the correct answer, I was able to narrow down that it's possibly wrong because of "was being.. for centuries" -- which seems to convey that the action import was continued for centuries (and hasn't concluded yet)-- while A avoids this entirely.

Could someone please validate?

SharbaniRoy · Answer

Can someone clearly explain why "was being imported" is wrong and "had imported" is correct?

DmitryFarber · Answer

SharbaniRoy

Think about how we describe something we have been doing for a period of time. For instance, "I have been studying the GMAT for 3 months" or "I have lived in this city for 20 years." I could say "I have been living in this city for 20 years," but I can't say "I am living in this city for 20 years." If it's a PRESENT activity, I don't add a time frame to it. That only makes sense when I use present perfect to extend from some past point into the present.

Now, let's say that I tell someone this information, and later they quote me. What do they say? Because they are quoting a PRESENT PERFECT statement that I made in the past, they just shift to PAST PERFECT. "Dmitry said he HAD lived in this city for 20 years" or "Dmitry said that he HAD been living in this city for 20 years." (These are basically equivalent.) If they said "Dmitry said that he WAS LIVING in this city for 20 years," that's just taking the wrong version from the previous paragraph ("I am living . . . for 20 years") and shifting it to the past.

Similarly, we can't say that the material "was being imported" for centuries.

DmitryFarber · Answer

hdsinghdang

Yeah, "which" isn't inherently wrong here. Sometimes the GMAT will distract us with trivial differences in the wording of noun modifiers to keep our eyes off the more central issues.

IlanaKM · Answer

Hi, can you please explain what is wrong with C? 
"Imported for centuries" sounds like a general explanation. Why do we need a past perfect tense as in D? 
Thanks

Ishmeet7 · Answer

Can someone help with comparable with vs comparable to? I thought with was used while comparing 'similar' things. Porcelain is similar to what was being imported (according to the intended meaning).

Someone, please help or suggest good reading material for this issue. It's been nagging me for a while and I've never found consistent solutions.

GMATNinja · Answer

The sentence starts with, "In 1719 the Meissen manufacturers  found ..." The word "found" is a simple past verb, so at first glance it's natural to assume that "imported" (another simple past tense verb) refers to an action that occurred at around the same time as the "found" action (in 1719).

Sure, once you finally get to the "for centuries" part (which doesn't come until the very end), you can figure out what's going on, but the past perfect ("had imported") makes the timing of the two actions more clear: the "found" part happened in 1719, and the "importing" part happened during the centuries leading up to 1719.

Is the simple past absolute wrong here? No, but the past perfect is a better fit.

There's also an idiomatic clue: we're comparing X to Y, so "comparable to" is a better phrase. (Luckily this is a very old question, and the current GMAT doesn't rely as heavily on idioms.)

So (C) isn't terrible, but (D) is a better option.

I hope that helps!

Wlcmtoiimindore · Answer

check the right option ...it mentions the use of 'had' which is used when 2 events are mentioned where one happened before the other. Therefore it is more appropriate.

In 1719 the Meissen manufacturers found a way of combining kaolin

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

In 1719 the Meissen manufacturers found a way of combining kaolin

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards