OFFICIAL EXPLANATIONProject SC Butler: Day 190: Sentence Correction (SC1)
In this case, a general understanding is enough: a plane crashed, some people are speculating about the cause of the crash, but investigators will not make a judgment right now. (Investigators "will withhold judgment.")
Investigators
will withhold judgment
until they
have examined certain items more thoroughly.
[My decision: this crash happened on the runway so everyone is safe.]
Issues tested: verb tense, meaning and logic, pronoun/noun agreement, and rhetorical construction
THE PROMPTQuote:
There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators will withhold judgment until they examined further the engine's strike marks and its cause.
THE OPTIONSQuote:
A) There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators will withhold judgment until they [have] examined further the engine's strike marks and its cause.
• pronoun/noun disagreement
-- The
marks on the engine are plural. Option A should say "
their cause," not "
its cause."
• Wrong verb.
Examined is simple past tense. We need
have examined. (present perfect = has/have + examined).
--
Until is a time frame "signal" or "code" word in English. When you see the word
until, be prepared to check verbs.
-- in general,
until refers to a span of time before a specified point in time or target date
Until means in the future or forward in time.
-- we use present perfect when we want to talk about an action performed during a time period that
has not yet finished. The time period in this sentence has not yet finished. The investigators must examine further.
--
have examined goes along with
will withhold judgment.
--
Correct:
Until they have further examined P and Q further, they will withhold judgment.--
Correct:
They will withhold judgment until they have further examined P and Q --
Wrong: Until they examined P and Q more thoroughly, they will withhold judgment. You cannot "examined" in the future.
The pronoun and verb errors are fatal. Eliminate A
Quote:
B) There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators will withhold judgment until they have further examined the strike marks on the engine and their cause.
• I do not see any errors
•
have examined corrects the error in (A)
• the plural possessive pronoun
their correctly refers to the plural
marks [on the engine].
•
will withhold corrects verb error in (D) and (E) (see below)
KEEP
Quote:
C) There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators will withhold judgment until they have further examined the cause for the strike marks and the engine.
• WTH? Nonsensical meaning. The investigators are not looking for the "cause" of the engine.
There is no such thing as a "cause" for (or of) an engine.
• When a causal relationship is involved, use
cause OF, not
cause for.
--
Correct: Viruses are the cause OF many illnesses.
--
Wrong: Viruses are the cause for many illnesses.
"Cause for" sort of means "having a valid reason for."
Correct but rarely seen on the GMAT:
The widening split between rich and poor is cause for alarm. (I have a good reason to be alarmed.)
There is no such thing as a cause for (or of) an engine. Eliminate C
Quote:
D) There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators have withheld judgment while there was a further examination of the strike marks on the engine and its cause.
• Wrong verb.
Have withheld should be
will withhold.
-- the investigators will continue one action (withholding judgment) until after another action is finished (examining P and Q).
-- the investigators
will [continue to]
withhold judgment until they have further examined P and Q
-- "investigators have withheld judgment" cannot be paired with "until they have further examined P and Q."
"have withheld" means "up to this point in time."
But the further examination comes in the future.
The investigators WILL withhold judgment until after the further examination is finished.
• same pronoun errors as that in (A):
marks, plural, cannot be paired with
its, singular
• rhetorical construction:
there was is often unnecessary.
-- GMAC is not fond of "there was" unless good reason exists to use it.
We use
there was when we want to de-emphasize the doer, do not know the doer, want to set a background.
In this sentence, there was is rhetorically unnecessary and makes the sentence less effective.
All the other options are not awkward without "there was"—we should be wary.
Eliminate D
Quote:
E) There has been some speculation that the severed engine of the airplane might have struck the tail, but investigators have withheld judgment until further examination of [the] engine, the strike marks, and the cause.
• verb error is similar to that in (D). We need
will withhold• further examination of "the cause"? Of what? The strike marks? The fact that the engine might have struck the tail? The accident generally?
• THE engine is correct. (I copied the question exactly as I found it. I suspect a transcription error. We need "the" engine in order to keep the list parallel but also because idiomatically, that noun takes an article.
Eliminate E
The answer is B • NOTESPronoun ambiguity in (B)? Nope.
-- The pronoun must have only one
logical antecedent.
It does not matter that other plural nouns exist.
Yes, the antecedent must agree in number and gender, but the mere fact of more than one noun in agreement
does not equal ambiguity.Ambiguity happens when there is more than one
logical antecedent for a pronoun.
The investigators are not examining themselves. ("Investigators" is the only other plural noun.)
COMMENTSarvind910619 and
pandajee , welcome to SC Butler.
I am glad to see a few people whose posts I haven't seen in awhile.
And of course I am glad to see posts from the core group of Butler participants whose good posts make these threads eminently readable.
In fact, note to people who have not read the thread: you should do so. These answers are excellent. A few are outstanding. You will find many different approaches, layers of analysis, ways of writing posts, and insights.
Nice work. Kudos to all.
close
11 Nov 2019, 23:07
45%
(medium)
39%
(01:43)
wrong 
