Arthurito wrote:
(A) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(B) Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, having the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, a technique called proton induced x-ray emission
(C) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it,
(D) A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced x-ray emission, which has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying it,
(E) A technique that was originally developed for detecting air pollutants and has the ability to analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance quickly and without destroying the substance, called proton-induced x-ray emission,
Can't we say :
B : having is modifying the preceding noun and it makes no sense to have the air polluants having the ability to do somehing
C : it has no clear referents : is it the substance or the chemical (since what follow chemical is only a modifier ? )
D : same as C
E : "called" modify the closest noun, so it is "the substance" and it makes no sense
So A is winner
GMATNinja is my reasoning good or was it luck ? congrats for the marathon again btw
I wouldn't be so quick to knock the pronoun in (C). After all, we see the same thing in the correct choice, (A)!
But compare the placement of "called proton-induced x-ray emission" in (A) and (C). In (A), this part comes right after the noun that it logically modifies ("a technique"). In (C), "called..." comes right after "air pollutants." It makes a lot more sense to apply the "called..." part to "technique," and the reader has to work a lot harder to figure that out in (C).
Also, at first glance, "called..." seems to be the second element of a parallel list: "A technique originally (1) developed for detecting air pollutants, (2) called proton-induced x-ray emission..." Again, the reader can figure out the logical meaning, but it takes some extra effort.
Does (C) have any definite errors? Maybe not, but the logical meaning is more clear in (A), making it a better option. And (D) is just an even-worse version of (C).
I'd also add that the parallelism is a bit hard to follow in (E). Repeating a "that" before "has the ability" would probably make it easier to tie both items back to the subject ("a technique"). The parallelism certainly isn't WRONG, exactly -- it's just harder to follow than the modifiers in (A).
In general you seem to be noticing the right things, so nice work!