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.
08 Dec 2021, 09:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
750Barrier
As described by EducationAisle in this post, it comes down to meaning:
- People now understand that the ozone is NOT immune from human influence (they've realized that humans' emissions of industrial chlorofluorocarbons deplete the ozone layer).
- But in the past, the ozone appeared to be immune from human influence.
- So at SOME point in the past, a realization was made and things changed: people went from (1) thinking the ozone was immune from human influence to (2) understanding that the ozone is NOT immune from human influence.
- We want our sentence (and the verb tenses) to clearly reflect that change.
Here's a slightly modified/simplified version of (B):
Quote:
Notice that "has appeared" and "have realized" use the same tense (present perfect). As a result, it seems as though these two actions are happening at the same time -- but that doesn't make any sense. Once people realized that emissions were depleting the ozone layer, they stopped thinking the ozone was immune from human influence (the ozone no longer appeared to be immune). Also note that the timing of "have been immune" in relation to "has appeared" is unclear in (B).
The past perfect in (D) expresses the logical timeline more clearly: the realization has already occurred, and the "appearing" happened at some point further in the past than the realization.
And if you're thinking, "Wait, how can we use "have realized" for something that already occurred?", consider these examples:
- "Since 2015, Tim has lived in Los Angeles, Breckenridge, and Queens."
Does this mean Tim started living in all three of those places in 2015 and that he still lives in all three of those places now? Of course not! It means that he's lived in each of those places between 2015 and now.
- "Tim has decided to quit his job."
Does this mean that Tim started deciding at some point in the past and is still in the process of deciding? Not exactly. The verb tense implies that the action happened at some unspecified time in the recent past.
As explained in this post, when you want to indicate a specific time frame in the past, a simple past verb makes sense. But if you only want to communicate that it happened at some unknown time in the past, present perfect can be acceptable, too.
I hope that helps!
23 Oct 2022, 22:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
arorag
This is an entry in Garner’s Modern English Usage. By no means is it dispositive, but it illustrates the danger in assuming one Idiom must be correct in all cases.
“Immune. May take the preposition TO or FROM, depending on nuance.
What you are “immune from_____” can’t touch you; what you are “immune to_____” may touch you but it has no effect.
To be “immune to” something is to be impervious to it:
“(The company) is immune TO the ups and downs of war and the economy.”
“Despite it’s considerable resources, Intel is not immune TO market forces.”
on the other hand, to be “immune from_____” something is to be free of some duty, liability, or restriction that others are subject to
“Judges are immune from such lawsuits.”
“(Several states) agreed last month to require that all investment houses….make stock analyst reports immune from influence by the investment banking side of their firms.”
I do believe in this case that “immune to” works better than “immune from”
—-humans have attempted (unintentionally) “to influence” the ozone for years through pollution and other such harmful acts. The prior belief was that the Ozone was immune TO these human influences.
—- it we were to say “the Ozone is immune FROM human influence”, the meaning implied would be that humans are incapable of affecting or influencing the Ozone (not true)
So, in this case “immune TO human influence” makes the most sense. However, which idiomatic construction to use may be a harder decision in another context.
Posted from my mobile device
23 Jul 2023, 12:40
Kudos
Bookmarks
KarishmaB
Why do we have semicolon connecting IC and DC? We have "though" in the second clause.
Sentence structure - Ozone reaches ....... ; Though, we have now realized....
Please let me know flaw in my understanding.
Why do we have semicolon connecting IC and DC? We have "though" in the second clause.
Sentence structure - Ozone reaches ....... ; Though, we have now realized....
Please let me know flaw in my understanding.
