In 1985, fewer than 1 million wild boars inhabited approxima

I would not eliminate B and D because use "is".
As far as we know he can still be in charge. It's not like we are talking about 1800s, he would be old but if he had 30 years in 1985 he today could still be in charge.

b. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, tracks the different state populations.
who is the manager (...) tracks <== this is not grammatically correct

d. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.
who is the manager and was tracking is not parallel

blueseas if i get you right, and must connect two parallel elements. Thus, who tracked the different state populations needs a verb in ' the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming' to become parallel?

Hi vibhav.

The noun phrase "the manager of ....." is an appositive (noun or noun phrase) that renames another noun right beside it. ==> "who" modifies John Rosen. Thus, we don't need a verb in the appositive (the manager of .....).

Example of appositive.
My iphone, the first smart phone model designed by Apple Inc, is very reliable.

Hope it helps.

pqhai, I see what you mean. What in your opinion then is the flay with option e? I think what blueseas meant was in the construct as presented in e, a verb is required (and i assume because) 'and' is a parallel marker. The two sides of and must be parallel.

Hi vibhav, I didn't get your question in the former post, cause you didn't mention option E. That's why I tried to explain the usage of "appositive", but you actually got it already.

Here is the Official Explanation from Veritas.

Answer A - The primary error type in this sentence correction problem relates to modifiers. In (A) the appositive modifier “the manager...” properly follows John Rosen, indicating that he was the manager of the group. The second modifier “who tracked the different state populations” is trickier: who tracked the different state populations? The wildlife research group. The original makes it clear that the group is being modified with this clause as it is the first logical noun before the clause (the others are places which cannot be modified by who). The others all contain fatal modifier flaws or other errors of meaning. In (B), “tracking the state populations” at the end is illogical and has nothing to modify. In (C), the modifiers are in the wrong location: the goal of the sentence is not to show that John Rosen was the manager, tracked all the state populations, and happened to be located in Wyoming! (D) erroneously suggests that all the 25 state populations were tracked in Wyoming and (E) again disconnects the modifiers improperly and has a parallelism error at the end.

In 1985, fewer than 1 million wild boars inhabited approximately 25 states, according to John Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, who tracked the different state populations.

A. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, who tracked the different state populations.
B. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, tracks the different state populations.
C. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group, who tracked the different state populations and was located in the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.
D. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.
E. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming and who tracked the different state populations.

Please explain why who does not refer here to Wyoming!

You have to post you query in the body of your post and not in the title.
Assuming your query is why 'who' cannot refer to Wyoming, its immediate preceding noun, Wyoming is a state in the US and Jackson is a town and not names of humans. Therefore, 'who' cannot modify any of them.

Hi,
as Daagh has also pointed out that there is nothing which 'who' can refer to apart from the manager.
lets see the sentence,,..
In 1985, fewer than 1 million wild boars inhabited approximately 25 states, according to John[u] Rosen, the manager ofthe wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, who tracked the different state populations.

the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson' is just modifying the manager..
so its ok as it is

Hi daagh !

I see nothing wrong with E, please check my reasoning!

D. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.

--> in D, we have a relative clause beginning with who. After the relative pronoun who, we have two predicates: is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming that are joined by conjuntion and.

---> It sounds structurally fine. IMO the problem may be the incorrect use of tense was tracking (we have no reason to use past progressive tense here) and the wrong position of modifier at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming. at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming should be put right after the wildlife research group.


E. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming and who tracked the different state populations.

--> in E, we have two types of modifiers : appositive the manager of the wildlife research group... and relative clause who tracked the different state populations that are joined by conjuntion and. These two modifiers correctly modifies Rosen.

---> For me, it sounds grammatically correct and conveys clear meaning.

Hi daagh sayantanc2k mikemcgarry egmat VeritasPrepKarishma !

Can some of you check my reasoning for me? Many thanks!

The true understanding of this question plays an important role in my understanding of modifiers, so please help me with this one!

I see nothing wrong with E, please check my reasoning!

D. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.

--> in D, we have a relative clause beginning with who. After the relative pronoun who, we have two predicates: is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming that are joined by conjuntion and.

--> It sounds structurally fine. IMO the problem may be the incorrect use of tense was tracking (we have no reason to use past progressive tense here) and the wrong position of modifier at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming. The modifier at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming should be put right after the wildlife research group.


E. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming and who tracked the different state populations.

--> in E, we have two types of modifiers : appositive (the manager of the wildlife research group...) and relative clause (who tracked the different state populations that are joined by conjuntion and). These two modifiers correctly modifies Rosen.

--> For me, it sounds grammatically correct and conveys clear meaning.

Yes, the meaning is okay but the structure is not. As you have stated, you have an appositive (a phrase without a verb) on one side and a relative clause (with a subject who and a verb tracked on the other side) connected by an 'and'. This structure is not equally - balanced. Therefore, in E there is a parallelism error.

It is usually said that who is used for people (and sometimes animals) while that is used to refer to objects.

In actual usage, though, both who and that can be used to refer to persons, sometimes to animals, and sometimes to entities that consist of people.

The dog who/that chewed the bone chased the cat.
The person who/that stole my purse used all my credit cards.
The group who/that went shopping was mugged.

That, not who, is used to refer to objects.

The house that Jack built is falling down.

"In this question, who refers to the wildlife research group".

Meaning - JR is the manager of research group. The research group is in National Wildlife refuge in Wyoming.
JR tracked the different state populations of wild boars.
As per JR, there are fewer than 1 million wild boars ...

a. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, who tracked the different state populations.
The manager ... - correctly describes JR
Who - refers to JR. Though it can also refer to the "group"
Pronoun ambiguity is not the elimination criteria - Hence keep this choice.

b. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming, tracks the different state populations.
who is - correctly refers to JR
tracks - according to JR, {ignore the phrase}, tracks ... - Absence of a proper subject to "tracks"
Tracks - present tense is incorrect. The meaning implies it was a one time event.
- Wrong

c. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group, who tracked the different state populations and was located in the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.
tracked and located - refers to "who" - correct
Here who can refer to group / JR
If who refers to JR - use of tracked is correct, but the group was lcoated in Jackson - meaning error
- Wrong

d. Rosen, who is the manager of the wildlife research group and was tracking the different state populations at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming.
"at the Refuge" - the presence of "at the National ..." implies that the state populations were located at refuge ...
-Wrong

e. Rosen, the manager of the wildlife research group at the National Wildlife Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming and who tracked the different state populations.
- "and who ..." - Incorrect parallelism
-Wrong

A is indeed the best among available options, but wanted to understand whether it is ideal that "who" can jump so far to reach to "John Rosen"?

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.