Because Miranda, the smallest moon of Uranus, has a large number of

Because Miranda, the smallest moon of Uranus, has a large number of different surface features, including craters, mountains, valleys, and fractures, some astronomers suggest that at one time repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of mutual gravitational attraction.

A. repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of -----1. and after which renders the sentence unparallel 2. Subsequently and after are redundant.

B. repeated impacts on the surface broke it apart, after which the fragments having rejoined with ----- after which is a subordinate clause but lack a verb; this is a fragment.

C. through repeated impacts that the surface broke apart, after which the fragments subsequently rejoined by ----- after and subsequently are redundant

D.the surface broke apart with repeated impacts, after which the fragments having rejoined through.--- after which is a subordinate clause, but lacks the finite verb
A.the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through. Correct sentence with no fragmentation or redundancy.

_________________

hi,

i dont think there is an idiomatic usage...and that is not the split here.the error her is the wrong referent of WHICH.
AS WHICH has a referent to the closeset noun....and here its creating ambiguity in wrong answer choices.

Because Miranda, the smallest moon of Uranus, has a large number of different surface features, including craters, mountains, valleys, and fractures, some astronomers suggest that at one time repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of mutual gravitational attraction.

A. repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined becaust of===>here comma AND is used...means two IC are separated but second IC starts with AFTER WHICH....here we dont know....what is WHICH refering to==hence not an IC==>WRONG
B.repeated impacts on the surface broke it apart, after which the fragments having rejoined with===>WHAT is which referring to SURFACE or REPEATED IMPACTS....logic wise it should refer to REPEATED IMPACTS ...but here its ambiguous.==>incorrect
C.through repeated impacts that the surface broke apart, after which the fragments subsequently rejoined by===>firstly its a fragment...secondly incorrect referent of WHICH.
SOME ASTRONOMER SUGGEST THAT AT ONE TIME THROUGH REPEATED IMPACTS.......now after this use of THAT introduces a new clause hence makes sentence fragment.
D.the surface broke apart with repeated impacts, after which the fragments having rejoined through.==>here WHICH has a correct referent REPEATED IMPACT....but the use of having rejoined makes it wrong===>it means fragment was already joined through gravitational attraction===>hence wrong.
E.the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through. ===>correct referent of WHICH and correct intended meaning.

hence its E.
HOPE it helps.

IMO : E
subsequently & after which ----> redundant. eliminates A and C
having ---- eliminates B and D

What about the "rejoined by" , "rejoined through" and "rejoined because of" are any of these idiomatic expressions?

After which, subsequently redundant? Can someone verify? Thanks!

As per my analysis of this question

some astronomers suggest that at one time..

So its best to the subject first and only D and E does that..

D had having incorrect but I had no solid reason to eliminate the other choices!

The answer is E. Subsequently is redundant.

Because Miranda, the smallest moon of Uranus, has a large number of different surface features, including craters, mountains, valleys, and fractures, some astronomers suggest that at one time repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of mutual gravitational attraction.

A. repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined becaust of

1. after which - subsequently : redundant
2. "after which" & "and" don't require "and" one connecting word is good enough


E.the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through.

look at choice A.
"and after which" requires "which" at the beginning of the sentence
the time at which I talked to her and after which I loved her is in the past.
this is correct sentence. choice A has no "which" at first, so, it can not have "after which" latter.

Because Miranda, the smallest moon of Uranus, has a large number of different surface features, including craters, mountains, valleys, and fractures, some astronomers suggest that at one time repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of mutual gravitational attraction.

(A) repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of - - don't need 'and' if you use 'after which' (no need for 2 linking words/phrases); redundancy: 'after which' means the same thing as 'subsequently', so having both is fatal
'because of' is sketchy; it suggests indirect causation, while the clear meaning is that gravitational attraction was directly responsible
bad parallelism: first half is in active voice, but second half is in passive voice
(B) repeated impacts on the surface broke it apart, after which the fragments having rejoined with - - 'it' could potentially refer to either 'surface' or 'miranda' (or even 'uranus')
- 'having rejoined with' isn't a verb (an actual bona fide verb is required for parallelism)
(C) through repeated impacts that the surface broke apart, after which the fragments subsequently rejoined by - the wording suggests that the surface broke apart by itself (although perhaps because of the urging of the impacts) - doesn't have anywhere near as much directness as it should;
redundancy: 'after which' means the same thing as 'subsequently', so having both is fatal
(D) the surface broke apart with repeated impacts, after which the fragments having rejoined through - - 'with' is incorrect as it indicates an aspect of the breakage process itself whereas repeated impacts caused that process
- 'having rejoined': same problem as in choice b
(E) the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through - Correct ; proper parallelism: the surface broke apart is parallel to the fragments rejoined

Answer E


"preposition + WHICH" plays the same modifying role as does plain "which" -- namely, it modifies the noun preceding the comma.

in the original sentence, then, this "after which" doesn't make any sense, because there is no noun in the appropriate position (i.e., preceding the comma).

in the correct answer, "after which..." correctly modifies the immediately preceding noun "(repeated) impacts".
_________________

e-gmat or GMATNinja request you to rectify my understanding

In POE, step I narrowed down the prospective answer to A and E.
I could not identify the redundancy error in option A.
In case of option E, I thought that the phrase, "fragments rejoined" alters the meaning. From my perspective, the phrases presents a meaning that the fragments themselves rejoined.
In case of option A, I could not find anything unusual aside from the passive tense usage.
Hence, providing a higher weightage to "meaning alteration" I decided to choose option A.

My questions are:
1. I would appreciate any guidance on how to spot a redundancy error, as I fail to stop such error number of times
2. Please clarify my confusion regarding the meaning change in option E.
Thank you.

An answer contains a redundancy if it contains two components that play the exact same role. For example, I could write, "Dave's toddler suffered a terrible injury, after which, he resolved to stop reenacting climactic battle scene from Game of Thrones with his small children." Or I could write, "Dave's toddler suffered a terrible injury; subsequently, he resolved to stop reenacting climactic battle scene from Game of Thrones with his small children."

But I'd never write, "Dave's toddler suffered a terrible injury, after which, he subsequently resolved to stop reenacting climactic battle scene from Game of Thrones with his small children," because "after which" and "subsequently" are conveying identical bits of information.

In this question, the question-writer hints that "subsequently" is unnecessary, as some of the answer choices contain the word, and some don't, and nothing is lost by deleting "subsequently" because every answer choice contains "after which."

As for concerns about changing the meaning, think of it this way: you are given five sentences. You want to pick the one that is the best option. If (E) has a different meaning than (A), but (E) is clearer -- or if (A) contains a mistake -- then (E) is a better sentence.

I hope that helps!
_________________

passive+by is used to show the agent/perfomer of the action. by+noun seldom shows the method of action .

fragment rejoin without the agent which performing rejoining , "through' is correct.

fragment rejoin through gravitation
fragment is rejoined by gratitation

both sentences are correct possiblly . but we dont have to differentiate them.

A,B and C illogically suggest that repeated impacts occurred at one time. It is clear the sentence is describing the characteristics of Uranus' moon, so it also wouldn't make much sense to make 'repeated impacts' the focal point of the scientists' suggestion; instead, it makes sense to make the broken surface the focus.

D - did the surface break apart as a result of the repeated impacts or did the surface AND the repeated impacts break apart together? It isn't clear, but its certainly illogical. "having rejoined" imposes a condition on the fragments without actually answering it. Having rejoined... what happens? We don't know.

E logically communicates that the surface is the focal point of the scientists' suggestion, that it broke apart from the repeated impacts, and that after the repeated impacts the fragments rejoined.

(A) repeated impacts broke the surface apart, and after which the fragments were subsequently rejoined because of

- don't need 'and' if you use 'after which' (no need for 2 linking words/phrases)
- redundancy: 'after which' means the same thing as 'subsequently', so having both is fatal
- 'because of' is sketchy; it suggests indirect causation, while the clear meaning is that gravitational attraction was directly responsible
- bad parallelism: first half is in active voice, but second half is in passive voice

vietst wrote:(B) repeated impacts on the surface broke it apart, after which the fragments having rejoined with

- 'it' could potentially refer to either 'surface' or 'miranda' (or even 'uranus')
- 'having rejoined with' isn't a verb (an actual bona fide verb is required for parallelism)

vietst wrote:(C) through repeated impacts that the surface broke apart, after which the fragments subsequently rejoined by

- read the whole thing: suggested that at one time through repeated impacts that... huh??
- the wording suggests that the surface broke apart by itself (although perhaps because of the urging of the impacts) - doesn't have anywhere near as much directness as it should

vietst wrote:(D) the surface broke apart with repeated impacts, after which the fragments having rejoined through

- 'with' is incorrect
- 'having rejoined': same problem as in choice b

vietst wrote:(E) the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through

CORRECT
- 'as a result of' = proper idiom
- proper parallelism: the surface broke apart is parallel to the fragments rejoined

Hi GMATNinja
in my opinion, the use of WHICH is worng in all the five choices, because WHICH can not refer to an action.

thanks and regards

First, a public service announcement: anytime you see an "error" in all five answer choices, whatever you saw must be acceptable! Look for other issues.

That said, take another look at the relevant portion of (E):

"...the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through mutual gravitational attraction."

The only rule for "which" is that it must modify a noun or noun phrase, and it must be reasonably close to what it modifies. Here, "which" seems to describe the "repeated impacts," and this makes perfect sense - after the impacts, the fragments rejoined.

The takeaway: anytime you see the same construction in all five answer choices, don't burn any brain cells trying to determine if the construction is correct! It has to be. Your job is to pick the best available option, not to construct the perfect sentence.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Hi GMATNinja EducationAisle CrackVerbalGMAT DmitryFarber EMPOWERgmatRichC EMPOWERgmatVerbal ExpertsGlobal5 generis gmat1393 GMATGuruNY GMATinsight Skywalker18

Others reject based on subsequently vs after ( A and C) but I rejected A, B and C because one time what? A,B and C denotes the wrong meaning. D and E start with right subject. Later D can be rejected because D has run on error in subordinate clause.
Please suggest am i correct in rejecting A, B and C?

Great question mSKR!

YES, you could reasonably reject options A, B, and C because the way they're written "muddles" the intended meaning. The GMAT prefers concise, simple answers over complex or overly wordy ones. In this case, options A, B, and C switch the subject and the object of the clause - and to do that, they have to be written using FAR too many words. Options D & E handle that part of the sentence much better - they are both clear and concise!

We hope that helps! There are often several different paths you can take to answer a GMAT SC question. We appreciate you telling us how you did it!
_________________

mSKR
We can't write A-C off simply because of their subject. For instance, if I say "One time, my brother stole my car," I could also reorder that and say "One time, my car was stolen by my brother." However, A-C are tricky in that they combine "at one time" with "repeated." Unless those repeated impacts all occurred in a very short span of time (like a flurry of punches or a meteor shower), it's odd to describe them as happening "at one time." It makes more sense to say that the surface broke apart at one time, as a result of impacts that may have happened at different times. However, A-B could work grammatically if it made sense to have a short sequence of repeated events. C, on the other hand, doesn't work at all, since it says "that the surface broke apart," leaving us with no main clause. In short, C is not a sentence!
_________________

Hello,
I am bit confused with answer E.
(E) the surface broke apart as a result of repeated impacts, after which the fragments rejoined through

I've learned that "as" should be followed by a clause.
It seems like noun phrase came after "as".
Can anyone explain this?

Thanks!!!