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

It is currently 12 Nov 2019, 02:00

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3648
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 13:28
7
21
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

77% (01:18) correct 23% (01:28) wrong based on 1372 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Project SC Butler: Day 1: Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

(A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

(C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

(E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,


The best/excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.
There may be no best/excellent answers, or a there may be a few excellent answers!
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3648
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 00:46
13
2
adkikani wrote:
generis GMATNinja VeritasKarishma aragonn egmat

Can you help me in choosing between A and C?

Quote:
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

Intended meaning: This sentence presents a few facts.
It says: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators who had bought on margin.
Spectators had to sell, and their act of selling pushed other investors to the brink.

A semicolon separates two independent clauses.
Quote:
A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

I see nothing much wrong here. Having + verb usually denotes earlier of two events in a sequence.
E.g. Having studied for the day, Roy went to play tennis to get refreshed.
Earlier action: Studying
Later action: Playing
I see no parallelism issue with subject: they
having is a modifier which modifies speculators.
Quote:
B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

Where is the subject in the independent clause after semi-colon?
Quote:
C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

See no issue here, had bought correctly denotes past perfect tense.
ie earlier of two events.
The sequence of events on the timeline:
  • Spectaculators bought on timeline
  • They sold
  • Their action of selling created panic among other investors.
who is a relative pronoun modifier modifying speculators.

You are very close.

Which option, A or C, establishes a clear sequence of events?
• the speculators purchased
• before the market declined and
• before the speculators were forced to sell

The buying came before the market decline.

Our split is
-- had bought on margin
OR
-- having bought on margin

One of these two is necessary. One clarifies sequences much more than the other does.

This issue is really hard, I think.
Even native speakers won't catch the problem with sequential logic
that is related to verb tenses in two of the answers.

I do not know the source of warrior1991 's quoted material (it's not from upthread :) ), but it contains excellent hints.
The material in quotes in that post is the key to this answer.

If A and B are
-- two different events that occurred at two different times in the past; and
--we have no dates such as "1924" or "1929"; and
-- we have no words such as "before or "after" that reference time,

Then we use

-- "the past of the past," also known as the past perfect, for the earlier event.

The simple past is used for the most/more recent event.

Example: The retail store manager thought that an employee had stolen merchandise.

(1) merchandise goes missing. AFTER THAT
(2) the manager suspects the employee

Past perfect is needed in this example to show sequence because there are no time markers or sequence words such as before, after, or later:
The retail store manager thought that an employee had stolen merchandise.

In this example, past perfect is not needed to show sequence (just simple past) because AFTER tells the sequence:
After the merchandise went missing, the manager suspected the employee of stealing it.
The word "after" make past perfect unnecessary in this second example.

• constructing the past perfect

The past perfect is constructed by using HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE (verbED)

past perfect is NOT constructed by using HAVING + PAST PARTICIPLE

That having construction
1) almost always acts as an adjective to modify the subject or a noun,
2) often suggests that a result is coming (Having practiced the piano piece often, she played it brilliantly at the concert.)
and
3) is called a "perfect participle." (The action is done. The action has been "perfected" -- finished.)

****
The constructions below are
-- NOT past perfect, i.e., they are
-- NOT the past of the past
although they DO indicate, usually as an adjectivial phrase, that an event has ended

HAVING + past participle (active)
or
HAVING + been + past participle (passive)

****
•Line up those two verb phrases:

had bought
or
having bought?

On really subtle issues it can pay to practice by writing each option into the sentence.

Remember:
-- if there are no dates to indicate time sequence; or
-- no words such as "before" or "after" that indicate time sequence
-- use past perfect. Past perfect is important to show sequence.

Finally, use past perfect only if you need it. If one answer uses simple past only and another uses past perfect, and both are correct, find a different issue error to eliminate one of them.

Hope that helps.
_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has -- Margaret Mead
Most Helpful Community Reply
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jun 2018
Posts: 1
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 04:54
30
1
3
My guess: C
Here is my explanation.
A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and - WRONG
Here, having acts as a noun modifier modifying speculators. So, the sentence incorrectly means speculators were bought on margin.

B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell - WRONG
Semicolon connects two independent clauses. Here, having had to sell... after the semicolon is not an independent clause.

C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and - CORRECT
The sentence correctly means speculators did the act of buying on margin.
Use of had to imply the earlier event (act of buying on margin) is correct (later event - ruined many speculators).
They and Their unambiguously refers to speculators.
Had after semicolon is needed because earlier event is they had to sell and the later event is their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell - WRONG
Wordy. Those is not required as it refers to speculators and who also refers to speculators.

E)speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell - WRONG
same error as in option A
parallelism (having bought on margin and having to sell) is not needed. It changes the intended meaning.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 03 Mar 2017
Posts: 369
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 20:23
8
This is related to tense structure.

Quote:
Meaning :-

1. In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators those who bought on margin.
2. They had to sell because of this decline
3. Because they sold , its effect pushed other investors to the brink.


Quote:
Remember for earlier event we use PAST PERFECT and for later event SIMPLE PAST.


Keeping this in mind we move on to choices.

A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and
"Having bought on margin" is not good and also is incomplete. Ignore

B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell
The part before semicolon is fine. Who correctly refers to speculators and had bought is as per the tense . But the part part after semicolon is blatant.
It sounds awkward.


C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and
The first part is correct as explained in option B. After semicolon is also a nice structure and is as per the tense structure as well. It also concisely represents the timing of the events . Hold on.

D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell
Those who is not needed . Option C is better choice. Ignore.


E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell
This is completely out of tense structure. Incorrect

IMO C.
_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the Gods, All the Heavens, and All the Hells lie within you.
General Discussion
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Oct 2018
Posts: 7
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 16:19
1
1
My guess: C is correct. It uses the correct tense and the semicolon is followed by an actual sentence
IIMA, IIMC School Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1371
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
CAT Tests
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 20:57
2
generis GMATNinja VeritasKarishma aragonn egmat

Can you help me in choosing between A and C?

Quote:
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.


Intended meaning: This sentence presents a few facts.
It says: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators who had bought on margin.
Spectators had to sell, and their act of selling pushed other investors to the brink.
A semicolon separates two independent clauses.

Quote:
A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

I see nothing much wrong here. Having + verb usually denotes earlier of two events in a sequence.
E.g. Having studied for the day, Roy went to play tennis to get refreshed.
Earlier action: Studying
Later action: Playing
I see no parallelism issue with subject: they
having is a modifier which modifies speculators.

Quote:
B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

Where is the subject in the independent clause after semi-colon?

Quote:
C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

See no issue here, had bought correctly denotes past perfect tense.
ie earlier of two events.
The sequence of events on the timeline:
  • Spectaculators bought on timeline
  • They sold
  • Their action of selling created panic among other investors.
who is a relative pronoun modifier modifying speculators.


Quote:
D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

coma+ those is awkward. Why do we need noun: the speculators when we can use pronoun they?

Quote:
E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

Where is the subject in the independent clause after semi-colon? Who must refer back to some noun/ subject in
second independent clause.
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Feeling stressed, you are not alone!!
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 03 Mar 2017
Posts: 369
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 23:40
2
adkikani wrote:
generis GMATNinja VeritasKarishma aragonn egmat

Can you help me in choosing between A and C?

Quote:
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.


Intended meaning: This sentence presents a few facts.
It says: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators who had bought on margin.
Spectators had to sell, and their act of selling pushed other investors to the brink.
A semicolon separates two independent clauses.

Quote:
A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

I see nothing much wrong here. Having + verb usually denotes earlier of two events in a sequence.
E.g. Having studied for the day, Roy went to play tennis to get refreshed.
Earlier action: Studying
Later action: Playing
I see no parallelism issue with subject: they
having is a modifier which modifies speculators.

Quote:
B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

Where is the subject in the independent clause after semi-colon?

Quote:
C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

See no issue here, had bought correctly denotes past perfect tense.
ie earlier of two events.
The sequence of events on the timeline:
  • Spectaculators bought on timeline
  • They sold
  • Their action of selling created panic among other investors.
who is a relative pronoun modifier modifying speculators.


Quote:
D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

coma+ those is awkward. Why do we need noun: the speculators when we can use pronoun they?

Quote:
E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

Where is the subject in the independent clause after semi-colon? Who must refer back to some noun/ subject in
second independent clause.



I ignored based on modifier issue. Having bought on margin in option A is not correctly referring to speculators.

Via meaning it seems the option A says that speculators were bought on margin.Read below again:-

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin.

This is not logical. This is why I ignored A. However in C who correctly refers to speculators.

Hope I am not wrong in my reasoning above.
_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the Gods, All the Heavens, and All the Hells lie within you.
Director
Director
avatar
P
Joined: 02 Oct 2017
Posts: 716
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 23:53
1
1
A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and
Having is not used correctly..so OUT

B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,
Having is not used correctly..so OUT


C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and
Correct. Had usage describes the timeline correctly. Clauses are correctly separated by semi colon

D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and
No need to mention these speculators again.Wordy as compared to C

E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,
Wrong usage of having

Having is used to show two timelines in the past; both are happening in different time frame
_________________
Give kudos if you like the post
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 10 Jan 2013
Posts: 303
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.95
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 23:58
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and
B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,
C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and
D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and
E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

My analysis:

looking at the options, I got to know that
a. after a semi-colon, we have an independent clause
b. "having" is usually wrong on the exam (please correct me on this)

Reject A,B,E - because of "Having"
Between C and D, the use of relative pronoun "who" is much better.

so C.
VP
VP
User avatar
D
Joined: 09 Mar 2016
Posts: 1229
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 00:17
1
u1983 wrote:
Manfo wrote:
C

“Their” sould not be underlined.

Posted from my mobile device


agreed .... corrected.


u1983 if " their "shouldn't be underlined then "many" shouldn't be either :)
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3648
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 00:48
1
dave13 wrote:
u1983 wrote:
Manfo wrote:
C

“Their” sould not be underlined.

Posted from my mobile device


agreed .... corrected.


u1983 if " their "shouldn't be underlined then "many" shouldn't be either :)

dave13 - you are correct. I just checked the source.
I am not going to win any awards for formatting today
Edited, thanks.
_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has -- Margaret Mead
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Oct 2018
Posts: 7
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 01:14
1
I just thought that I could remember questions in which the OA said that if only "Josephine Baker's life" is mentioned, the antecedent is Josephine Baker's life and not Josephine Baker herself. I guess I mixed it up. Thanks!
Director
Director
avatar
P
Joined: 21 May 2013
Posts: 634
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 02:33
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 1: Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

Answer is C
We need the structure " Declines ruined many spectators who bought on margin". Also, only in C, we have IC after semicolon.


The best/excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.
There may be no best/excellent answers, or a there may be a few excellent answers!
Retired Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5176
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 05:20
3
Top Contributor
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

Even before delving further,
I am removing E for its brazen fragmentation
I am removing B, because, the modification in the second part is awry
I am eliminating D for the redundancy of 'speculators those.' We will discuss A and C

A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and --- ' having bought on margin' -- This phrase indicates a cause and effect. The choice implies a cause and effect that "because they had bought on margin they had to sell. The reasons were the declines, small or significant, that drove them to sell and not the margin buying.
When you trade on margins, because of the leverage, the losses are likely to be colossal and as such the exchanges will square up those deals without notice, bringing in a cascading effect and leading to eventual collapse.
Therefore having bought is not an appropriate expression. This is a subtle technicality and can be best understood by those who indulge in margin trading in
the stock market
But there is no doubt that having bought refers to the speculators who bought and not speculators who were bought! If we want to say that the speculators had been bought, we must say, "speculators having been bought"

C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and; Green signal has already been given by rejecting all the other four to declare this as the correct one with legitimate modification and pronoun reference.
_________________
Are you stuck around 630? If you can't pole-vault above 630, spare 30 hours and you can fly on top.
"Winners never quit and quitters never win". (+919884544509)
Senior SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1347
Location: Malaysia
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 23:16
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 1: Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

(A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

(C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

(E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,


Time - Volume 114, Part 2 - Page 130

In 1929 relatively small drops in the market ruined many plungers who had bought on margin. They had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink. The bull market had been built on flimsy credit, and when it started to topple, it did not fall slowly, but all at once.
_________________
"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!

Advanced Search : https://gmatclub.com/forum/advanced-search/
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 16 May 2016
Posts: 199
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: ESSEC '21 (A$)
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.5
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2018, 23:36
1
(A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and
Wrong: Having brought is an incorrect structure

(B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,
Wrong: after a semicolon, it is necessary to have IC

(C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and
Correct: speculators modified with the relative pronoun 'who', and after a semicolon we have IC

(D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and
WRONG: modifier error and 'had to sell'

(E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,
WRONG: again having bought error
_________________
Not Giving UP! Kudos if you like the question :)
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 24 Mar 2018
Posts: 246
CAT Tests
Re: In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Nov 2018, 07:37
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 1: Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

(A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

(C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

(E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,


The best/excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.
There may be no best/excellent answers, or a there may be a few excellent answers!


My OA is C
who had bought is better than having bought so A rejected
Secondly in D those and thses are just making the sentence messier
Thirdly in who had is better than who having so E rejected
Now left with B and C
In B having had to sell
Who had to sell is not clearly mentioned.
So C is the answer
Please correct me if I am wrong
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3648
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Nov 2018, 16:43
1
2
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 1: Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

(A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,

(C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and

(D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

(E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

Please, for this post, no kudos.
This is the first OE ("official explanation") post in the series. It contains
• GMAC's official explanation
• further explanation, and
• my chance to be appreciative.


Thank you to all who posted!

• Some posters here have been on the forum for awhile; I mention their tenure because people in this group
have enriched the forum, enlivened debate, and contributed in more ways than I can describe.

That group includes: dave13 , u1983 , warrior1991 , adkikani , hazelnut , Cbirole , daagh , push12345 , saurabh9gupta , KS15, and teaserbae

• Other posters are relatively or very new. I mention their tenure as a segue to say: Welcome to GMAT Club!
That group includes vsowmiya , julie123 and Manfo.

• And if this wonderfully diverse group has not yet convinced a few lurkers, ;) l hereby do so directly:
Please post. It's okay if you get the answer wrong or not quite right or make a mess of the formatting (per the latter, I already won that prize on this question.)

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
Quote:
Choice A can be faulted because having bought on margin does not precisely establish a sequence of events; who had bought on margin is needed to indicate that the speculators made their purchases before there were declines in the market and before they were forced to sell.

A few answers note a problem with "having bought on margin."

• Recognizing that having bought on margin is a problem, even if you do not know exactly why, is a very good start
• Explaining why having bought on margin is a problem is, of course, is ideal

The takeaway in this case is a fairly simple guideline about past tenses.
If more than one event happened in the past; and sequence is not clear from dates or words such as "before" and "after";
and the event or its effect does not affect the present, then

-- the first event is constructed using HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE
This "had + past participle" construction is often described as the "past of the past."
-- the final event uses (or the final events use) simple past tense construction.

The ever-resourceful hazelnut provided us with original material from which GMAC crafted the question:
In 1929 relatively small drops in the market ruined many plungers who had bought on margin. They had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

The Times sentence above uses
[HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE],
[SIMPLE PAST],
and [SIMPLE PAST]

-- HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE will indicate a sequence IF both events happened in the past and at least one of them is rendered, as here, in the simple past.

-- HAVING + PAST PARTICIPLE does not mean the same thing as HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE.
Almost always, to talk about a series of events that all occurred in the past
and that have no relevance now, use HAD + past participle, not HAVING + past participle.

Option A is confusing. As daagh points out , the causal order is specialized knowledge.

The verb tenses, however, do not require special knowledge.

One event ======> 2 events|| ended
Then use
HAD/HAVE + past participle=>SIMPLE past|| ended

This test is multiple choice. Compared to (C), option (A) does not use a clear "past of the past."

Quote:
B supplies the needed phrasing but introduces another problem: the phrase having had to sell dangles for lack of an appropriate noun to modify, and the sentence illogically states that their selling, not the speculators, had to sell.


Quote:
Choice C is the best answer.


Quote:
D is needlessly wordy, awkward, and repetitious.

That explanation does not say much.

As a few have pointed out, the word we are looking for is redundant

The OE states that (D) is "needlessly wordy" and "repetitious."

The first phrase itself borders on redundancy. I haven't seen too many needfully wordy sentences lately.

And WHY is (D) "needlessly wordy"? Answer: because (D) uses nouns and pronouns "repetitiously." The OE's explanation is itself redundant.

D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and

The option does indeed produce an awkward sentence, but
unless you are down to exactly two choices and you cannot see any other errors,
do not use what you think is "awkward" to eliminate answers.
That guideline applies to native and non-native speakers alike.

If you can start to describe "awkward," the situation improves.
"This option is awkward because it sets the noun speculators with its pronoun those right next to one another.
Compared to option __________ , the construction in (D) is indeed awkward."

Quote:
E is ungrammatical because who is presented as the subject of a clause with no completing verb.


We were not clear. We want answers with explanations. The latter need not be long.
For example, if you have marked a portion of the sentence as inaccurate, explain why it is inaccurate.

Best replies get 2 kudos today (We will need 4-5 hours to award the second kudos)
Excellent replies get 1 kudo today


Best non-expert reply: vsowmiya
Best reply generally daagh

Honorable mentions: adkikani , warrior1991 , and push12345

Nice work, all!
_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has -- Margaret Mead
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3648
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Nov 2018, 02:07
3
saurabh9gupta wrote:
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and their selling pushed other investors to the brink.

A) speculators having bought on margin; they had to sell, and
B) speculators who had bought on margin; having had to sell,
C) speculators who had bought on margin; they had to sell, and
D) speculators, those who had bought on margin; these speculators had to sell, and
E) speculators, who, having bought on margin and having to sell,

My analysis:

looking at the options, I got to know that
a. after a semi-colon, we have an independent clause
b. "having" is usually wrong on the exam (please correct me on this)

Reject A,B,E - because of "Having"
Between C and D, the use of relative pronoun "who" is much better.

so C.

saurabh9gupta , I would not rely on the proposition that "having" is "usually wrong" on the GMAT
unless I were guessing or rushed or both.

True, GMAC includes "having ___ " in one or two incorrect answer choices on a fairly frequent basis.
I did a quick analysis of the first 20 and last 20 questions in OG Verbal Review 2018.

In the first 20, "having ____" was incorrect in these questions/options:
195 B; 196 B; 201 D and E; 205 A; and 207 D

In the last 20, "having ______" was incorrect in these questions/options:
283 D and 290 B

Not one of 40 questions contained the correct use of "having _____."

So if you can't find another reason to eliminate an answer,
the odds are indeed usually in your favor.

I am not a fan of playing the odds when I can't see the expressions
of the human beings who are dictating the odds.

THIS question, from GMAT Prep,
for example, correctly uses having ______.

Having + past participle
or
Having + been + past participle

Both of those having _____ are called "perfect participles."
You do not need to know the terminology, although in this case, I think jargon might help.

Perfect participles are not verbs.
Perfect participles almost always act as an adjective.

One way to check "having + past participle," (having + verbED) then, is to see whether it modifies a subject or noun. Is the phrase an adjective? If so, there is a good chance that the phrase is correct.

Having peered skyward just in time, he witnessed a shooting star and made a wish.
-- "having peered skyward" modifies the man who saw a shooting star.
The phrase is an adjective. It is placed next to the subject/noun.
-- Nor could we make a sentence. (The phrase is not a verb.)
We could not say "He having peered skyward just in time and made a wish."

By contrast, we could say, He had peered skyward just in time to see a shooting star, and made a wish.

So I would just be careful about eliminating options only because they contain "having ____."

A similar guideline about the word "being" was in effect a few years ago,
and after this "guideline" circulated for awhile, GMAC released OG questions whose correct answer included "being."

I hope that helps. :)
_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has -- Margaret Mead
GMAT Club Bot
In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator   [#permalink] 13 Nov 2018, 02:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In 1929 relatively small declines in the market ruined many speculator

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne