Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
31 Mar 2020, 09:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
Quote:
GMATNinja Even if 'which' is replaced by 'it', will it not be pronoun ambiguity as 'it' can again be private conversation/telephone/tool/radio ? On a broader note, if we are faced with such ambiguity will it make sense to assume the logical antecedent which in this case is 'radio' and proceed, or should we keep this as a last resort and go for other mistakes?
Also what if there are no other errors ?
31 Mar 2020, 11:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
Gokul20 We should never automatically rule out a pronoun simply because there are multiple possible antecedents. We only want to knock it out if the meaning is unclear. This can feel a bit subjective, but one useful thing to look for is whether we have the option to replace the pronoun with a noun. If we do, that's often a sign that the pronoun is considered ambiguous or incorrect. Another useful tendency is that we tend to default to using the pronoun to refer to the subject or--if that doesn't make sense--a noun that is in the sentence core rather than a modifier. Take a look at these examples:
My partners objected to the way in which I distributed funds to our investors, but they . . .
(At this point, I'd assume "they" referred to "my partners." If I wanted to refer to funds or investors, I'd need to take extra care to make that meaning clear. I might avoid the pronoun altogether and say "but these funds" or "but our investors.")
She was able to remove the stone from the elephant's foot, but it . . .
(Since "stone" is part of the sentence core and "elephant's foot" is in a prepositional modifier, I'd assume "it" referred to "stone." It would be a bit sketchy to finish something like "it walked with a limp for two months," although of course the *intended* meaning would be clear.)
A frequent visitor to the tidepools has found that the population of sea hares has increased markedly, and they . . .
(This one is a bit rough. Both "tidepools" and "sea hares" are in prepositional modifiers. I think the GMAT would probably clarify with a noun at this point. Note that outside the GMAT, I'd assume that "they" referred to "a visitor," but the GMAT is stuck in the Stone Age and won't acknowledge the use of "they" to refer to a single person of unspecified gender.)
My partners objected to the way in which I distributed funds to our investors, but they . . .
(At this point, I'd assume "they" referred to "my partners." If I wanted to refer to funds or investors, I'd need to take extra care to make that meaning clear. I might avoid the pronoun altogether and say "but these funds" or "but our investors.")
She was able to remove the stone from the elephant's foot, but it . . .
(Since "stone" is part of the sentence core and "elephant's foot" is in a prepositional modifier, I'd assume "it" referred to "stone." It would be a bit sketchy to finish something like "it walked with a limp for two months," although of course the *intended* meaning would be clear.)
A frequent visitor to the tidepools has found that the population of sea hares has increased markedly, and they . . .
(This one is a bit rough. Both "tidepools" and "sea hares" are in prepositional modifiers. I think the GMAT would probably clarify with a noun at this point. Note that outside the GMAT, I'd assume that "they" referred to "a visitor," but the GMAT is stuck in the Stone Age and won't acknowledge the use of "they" to refer to a single person of unspecified gender.)
31 Mar 2020, 13:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Gokul20
In B, if we replace which with it, we get:
Marconi conceived of the radio as a substitute for the telephone, a tool for private conversation, but it is precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.
Here, the red portion is a nonessential modifier.
Generally, we should be able to remove a nonessential modifier without altering the core meaning of the sentence.
If we remove the red portion, we get:
Marconi conceived of the radio as A SUBSTITUTE for the telephone, but it is precisely the opposite, A TOOL for communicating with a large, public audience.
Conveyed meaning:
The two colored portions are OPPOSITES.
This comparison seems illogical.
A TOOL is not the opposite of a SUBSTITUTE.
The intended meaning is conveyed by the OA:
Marconi conceived of the radio as a tool for private conversation that could substitute for the telephone; instead, it has become precisely the opposite, a tool for communicating with a large, public audience.
Here, the two colored portions can logically be considered opposites.
A TOOL FOR COMMUNICATING WITH A LARGE PUBLIC AUDIENCE is the opposite of A TOOL FOR PRIVATE CONVERSATION.
Quote:
Pronoun ambiguity should be considered a LOW-PRIORITY ERROR.
If the only error in an answer choice seems to be a potentially ambiguous pronoun, keep the answer choice.
Eliminate it only if an alternate answer choice avoids the ambiguity and is free of errors.
) like 
