In their latest press release, the company's new management stated a

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning of this sentence is that the new managers of the company stated that they plan to expand its operations into the global software market.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Pronouns + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- “expanding" in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

A: Trap. The sentence formed by this answer choice incorrectly uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular noun "management". Further, Option A suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as the pronoun "its" can refer to either "company" or "management".

B: The sentence formed by this answer choice incorrectly uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular noun "management". Further, Option B suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as the pronoun "its" can refer to either "company" or "management". Additionally, Option B alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "new company's management"; the use of "new" to modify "company's" rather than "management" incorrectly implies that the managers of a company that is new stated that they plan to expand its operations into the global software market; the intended meaning is that the new managers of the company stated that they plan to expand its operations into the global software market. Besides, Option B uses the needlessly wordy phrase "that they planned on expanding its operations", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: Correct. The sentence formed by this answer choice correctly uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the plural noun "managers". Further, Option C clearly refers to the noun "company's" with the pronoun "its". Additionally, Option C uses the clause "the company's new...to expand its operations", avoiding the modifier error seen in Option D and conveying the intended meaning - that the new managers of the company stated that they plan to expand its operations into the global software market. Besides, Option C is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "expanding into the global software market"; the use of the "comma + present participle ("verb+ing" - "expanding" in this sentence)" construction incorrectly implies the company's new managers stated their plan for the company's operations, and in doing so expanded the company into the global software market; the intended meaning is that the company's new managers stated that they plan to expand the company's operations into the global software market; please remember, the introduction of present participle ("verb+ing"- “expanding" in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

E: The sentence formed by this answer choice incorrectly uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular noun "management". Further, Option A suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as the pronoun "its" can refer to either "company" or "management". Besides, Option E uses the needlessly wordy phrase "that they planned to expand its operations", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Comma plus Present Participle for Cause-Effect relationship" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~3 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Options B and D, change the meaning of the sentence by modifying company to new company, hence they are out.

Among A,C and E. the plural pronoun Their needs to have plural referent which is present only in option C.

Hence C is correct, in C pronoun its also refers back to the company.

Jackouille :- if we change the company`s new managers to the management of the company, then the option would not be correct because the plural pronoun their will not have any antecedent. however if you change it to the managers of the company, then the choice would be correct because their will refer to managers and its will refer to company.

see a similar example for reference of its in an article from NY times.
'Apple on Wednesday reported the kind of quarter most big companies would envy, posting a profit of $13.1 billion and selling 28 percent more iPhones and 48 percent more iPads, its two biggest products'

Here its refers to Apple.

I thought possessive could not be referred back with a pronoun. Can someone cite some other similar examples to debunk this myth of mine

In their latest press release, the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations into the global software market via a series of acquisitions in Asia and Latin America.

As the no nunderlined portion has plural, we need to use plural company's new managers and not the singular company's new management

This leaves us only with C and D. D changes the meaning.

Hence C.

----------------------------
Kudos please:)

In their latest press release, the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations into the global software market via a series of acquisitions in Asia and Latin America.
A) the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations
B) the new company's management stated that they planned on expanding its operations
C) the company's new managers stated their plan to expand its operations
D) the new company managers stated their plan for its operations, expanding
E) the company's new management stated that they planned to expand its operations

here the subject is company's new managers which points to new managers as the subject of the sentence.But in the sentence the pronoun its refers correctly refers to company. its should refer to the subject mangers only na?can someone pls explain?

The sentence begins with "In their latest press release" so the subject must be plural.
Only C and D remains. expanding is a -ing form after a comma, it modifies the precedent clause. Wrong used in this way. This construct is used to express the consequences of an action for instance (usage-of-verb-ing-modifiers-135220.html)
C is correct



"Managers" it's pluarl, "its" must refer to the company
Hope this clarifies.

C) the company's new managers stated their plan to expand its operations
Y) the new managers of the company stated their plan to expand its operations

The highlighted parts have the same meaning and do not cause problems with pronouns or anything like that: here (in my opinion) are both correct.

In their latest press release, the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations into the global software market via a series of acquisitions in Asia and Latin America.

A) the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations
this answer choice does not have the pronoun error, but it has idiom error. "a plan to expand" indicates purpose. "a plan for expansion" is not a correct idiom.
B) the new company's management stated that they planned on expanding its operations
"they" does not have clear reference
C) the company's new managers stated their plan to expand its operations
it is clear that the reference of their in "their plan" is managers and its clearly refers to company. the only pronoun that can correctly refer back to a possessive noun is possessive pronoun. and "their plan to expand the company's operation" correctly indicates the purpose of the plan.
D) the new company managers stated their plan for its operations, expanding
ING-modifier modifies the previous clause which is "the managers stated". a non-sense modification!!
E) the company's new management stated that they planned to expand its operations
they does not have clear reference

In their latest press release, the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations into the global software market via a series of acquisitions in Asia and Latin America.
A) the company's new management stated a plan for expansion of its operations
B) the new company's management stated that they planned on expanding its operations
C) the company's new managers stated their plan to expand its operations
D) the new company managers stated their plan for its operations, expanding
E) the company's new management stated that they planned to expand its operations

The brightest clue is located at the beginning of the sentence. Non underlined section.
Their must refer plural object. Thus, eliminate A, B, and E

Btw C and D, we understand that the company has been releasing info to press. It cannot be a new one. Thus, eliminate D.
C wins.

> If it is allowed to refer back possessive with a pronoun. Are both the sentences correct..??

1.In case the human body's intake of carbohydrates is sufficiently low, it will enter ketosis, a state in which it directly metabolizes fat rather than glucose.

2.In the case of a sufficiently low carbohydrate intake, the human body enters ketosis, a state in which it directly metabolizes fat rather than glucose.

Both the sentences are not correct.

Sentence 1 is INCORRECT. The pronoun IT cannot refer to "Human Body's" (possessive noun).

Sentence 2 is CORRECT. The pronoun IT refers to "Human Body".

Hi AryamaDuttaSaikia
I have a doubt if it's not allowed to refer back to a possessive- how come this sentence is correct.

Isn't it referring to company?

the company's new managers stated their plan to expand itsoperations

BUt I read it in the manhattan's book that pronouns are not allowed to refer back possessive.
Can someone pls guide on this?

PraktanP Two things about possessives and pronouns:

1) The rule you're thinking of--"possessive poison"--states that a non-possessive pronoun can't refer back to a possessive noun, so if we followed that rule, we couldn't say "Sandeep's wife loves him," because technically there's no antecedent for "him," even though the intended meaning is obvious! However, this doesn't stop the possessive "its" from referring back to the possessive "company's." In other words, that rule doesn't apply to this problem.

2) The GMAT has actually abandoned this rule, so feel free to say "Sandeep's wife loves him" to your heart's content.

I narrowed down the answer choices to C and E. I am unable to understand why E is wrong. Could somebody please enlighten me on this?

daagh Please see this. I have read that it is not allowed to refer back to possessive noun with a pronoun but here its something else.
Moreover, Manhattan also did the same thing. As per mgmat this is correct.

Even I knew the same thing as yours. Confused too.