The Coast guard is conducting tests to see whether pigeons can be

In A - can be trained to help find - is a literary form of elliptical writing where the infinitive to is dropped to obtain some cogency. Imagine the expression - can be trained to help to find – not very elegant, I feel. Here are some examples

For many aspirants, MGMAT SC is the Bible [highlight]to help solve[/highlight] many SC questions

750 in GMAT will be the best ladder [highlight]to help reach[/highlight] the corridors of the Whartons and the Harvards


Structurally – help – in B is used as a noun following the preposition - as -, the meaning of which is – assistant or associate or aide etc.
Its problem is that it is not very idiomatic to say - trained as help -

hi nikhil,

In GMAT use IF...only when you have construction like: IF X, THEN Y===>Without this it will always be incorrect in GMAT.
TAKE SOME EXAMPLE.
if you exercise daily,then you stay healthy.

that is the problem in the above question.....hence use of IF is INCORRECT.
MOREOVER THERE ARE OTHER ERRORS TOO...but you can eliminate the option on the basis of "IF "

HOPE IT HELPS

"If" is used to present hypothetical situations.
"Weather" is used to present a choice.
I'll decide Weather (...)
@shaileshmishra, you are not correct:

Official question #40 OG:

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginningof next year, but only if non- OPEC nations, including Norway. Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day.

CORRECT ANSWER: E)year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output

Official question #82 =G:

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

CORRECT ANSWER: B)if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food,

sorry ZARR0LOU,

see IF -THEN construction are use to express condition.
there are types of construction possible with IF-THEN

1) IF clause 1,THEN clause 2
2) IF clause 1 ,clause 2========>(THEN can be omitted but you can make out that THEN can be placed there)
3) clause 2,IF clause 1=========>(THEN can be ommited and THEN part is ahead of IF clause)

now in your given example:
Official question #40 OG:

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had long been expected to announce a reduction in output to bolster sagging oil prices, but officials of the organization just recently announced that the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginningof next year, but only if non- OPEC nations, including Norway. Mexico, and Russia, were to trim output by a total of 500,000 barrels a day.

CORRECT ANSWER: E)year only if non-OPEC nations, including Norway, Mexico, and Russia, trim output

THIS example comes under the category of CASE 3(clause 2,IF clause 1)==>LET ME SHOW YOU:

CLAUSE 2 (the group will pare daily production by 1.5 million barrels by the beginningof next year) onlyIF CLAUSE 1(non- OPEC nations, including Norway. Mexico, and Russia, trim output by a total of 500,000 barels a day)

Official question #82 =G:

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

CORRECT ANSWER: B)if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food,
THIS example comes under the category of CASE 2.( IF clause 1 ,clause 2)====>LET ME SHOW YOU AGAIN:

IF CLAUSE 1 (criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food), CLAUSE 2(the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.)

so i will say i am not wrong ,rather you misunderstood something.

let me know if anything more to clarify.

IMO - A

The Coast guard is conducting tests to see whether pigeons can be trained to help find survivors of wrecks at sea.

>> We don't require a IF-Then construction here. 'whether' is apt indeed to show highlight the condition. Also, we require to see after ...tests to correctly show the reason of the tests. Therefore, C,D,E gone. Between A & B, A is correctly imparting the intended meaning that main work of pigeons is to help in finding, not just as help. [please reread to know the difference between A&B ]

(A) to see whether pigeons can be trained to help find >> CORRECT intended meaning

(B) to see whether pigeons can be trained as help to find >> In original sentence 'find' is the main work pigeons are suppose to help in. using as help here is changing the meaning slightly, help becomes main work pigeons to used in to find survivors...

(C) to see if pigeons can be trained for helping to find >> additionally, to help find (verb) preferred over for helping to find (noun)

(D) that see if pigeons are able to be trained in helping to find >> additionally, are able to be trained is wordy

(E) that see whether pigeons are able to be trained for help in finding >> additionally, to find (verb) preferred over in finding (noun)

GMATNinja & GMATNinjaTwo, Does the infinite to help find (to + verb + verb) is the correct usage in GMAT? It is confusing for the usage. Could you please help to explain?

In this case, "help" functions a little bit like a helping verb, and it's completely fine to use "help + verb" under the right circumstances.

These look fine, right?

• Charles must eat eight meals per day. --> "Must" is the helping verb, so it's no problem to use "must + verb."
• Mike can surf as well as Kelly Slater. --> "Can" is the helping verb, so it's no problem to use "can + verb."

"Help" isn't technically a helping verb, but you can use it in a similar way:

• An increase in government jobs programs will help reduce unemployment to its lowest levels since the 1990s.

In this case, it probably wouldn't make sense to use "reduce" by itself: the jobs programs won't accomplish this goal on their own, so you'd need to say "help reduce" to convey the correct meaning. Grammatically, this is completely fine. Sometimes, you'll see this written as "help to reduce", and that's technically fine as well, though most grammar experts would argue that the "to" is unnecessary.

Can someone help further explain why "that help" is ungrammatical? Is there a rule to go along with this?

gmatman1031 , The usage of "that" can be confusing.

D) The Coast guard is conducting tests that see if pigeons are able to be trained in helping to find survivors of wrecks at sea.

E) The Coast guard is conducting tests that see whether pigeons are able to be trained for help in finding survivors of wrecks at sea.

The word "that" often modifies the immediately preceding noun.

In this case, "that" modifies "tests."

Tests do not "see" in the sense of determine, judge, or ascertain.
Tests do not have eyes or powers of reasoning.

English speakers commonly say something such as, "Let's see whether we can fix this problem."
In that context, human beings are talking to and about other human beings.

The Coast guard people theoretically could "see" (could determine) whether pigeons could be trained to do X,
but the tests themselves do not see [literally, tests cannot reason].

GMATNinja wrote a terrific post about uses of THAT on the GMAT, HERE.

I hope that answer helps.

generis, thanks for passing along that article. That was super helpful

I'm still confused though as to why tests can't see. I know this sounds stupid, but here a few headlines from the Economist:
As Western lenders retreat, African banks see an opportunity
The computer will see you now

I even found this headline in a local paper (BlueRidge Now):
Essay tests see fall from grace

gmatman1031 , I admire your tenacity and diligence.

What you say does not sound stupid at all.
You are trying to understand what appears to be a disparity.

Try these things, please:
(1) try to absorb the fact that see and determine are synonyms but that they are not identical.
A test can [be programmed to] determine something (e.g. whether you have flu antibodies in your blood).
But to "see" almost always implies human agency.

(2) Do not use headlines as grammar guides (see below)

(3) If this explanation fails, tell me why, specifically, you think that tests CAN "see," using a definition.

The rule you are looking for is not a guarantee, but . . .
If human beings and tests are involved, the human beings do the thinking.
The people determine whether the pigeons can assist with survivors of wrecks.
The people devise the test, deploy the test, gather the information from the test,
and assess the information. The test is not seeing anything.

The test may determine (MEASURE) how long a pigeon takes to find a human being floating in the water.

The test does not determine (DECIDE, ASCERTAIN) whether the number of successes is statistically significant.

THIS definition of "see" from Oxford online
states that "see" means "discern or deduce after reflection or from information; understand."

Tests cannot understand.

If a test is set up in a certain way, the test can determine, for example,
whether a person has high cholesterol.
But a test does not observe, gather information, and draw conclusions.
The test measures. A test can generate information,
but a test cannot determine what to do with or how to interpret that information.

With respect to the print journalism you found, those headlines traditionally do not have to be grammatical sentences.

(1) Headlines are not grammatical. They're catchy. See below.

(2) You will find odd headlines in all types of journalism. You will even find occasional errors in the text of the story because . . .
Journalists work on brutal deadlines.
Copy editors miss items.

If you read the New York Times and the Economist,
I would bet that 98+ percent of the time,
the text written by the journalist (i.e., text that is not quoted material and not the headline),
will be correct.

So headlines in newspapers are not very reliable sources for grammar.

Print journalism must grab our attention quickly.
Dramatic, offbeat, and clever headlines often do not follow grammar rules.

The New York Times is among the most well-written and -edited of newspapers.
Here are three headlines from the Times that will never be part of a GMAT sentence.

• For Pantyhose, It’s Back to Work (personification - pantyhose do not have paying jobs)
• Asked to Get Slim, Cheese Resists (personification - cheese does not have ears and cheese cannot resist)
• When Is a Gym More Than a Gym? When It’s a Brand (incomplete sentence)

As for The Economist headlines?

All journalists and editors have to "sell" stories. Punchy headlines help.

The Computer Will See You Now, for example, is a really shrewd way
to grab a reader's attention.

Here's another reason to eliminate (E): the end of the sentence is atrocious.

(E) are able to be trained for help in finding

(A) can be trained to help find

Option A is better than E stylistically.
(A) conveys identical information in fewer words that are more active and more direct.

I hope that analysis helps.
If it does not, try asking a very specific question that has to do with meaning and logic, as well as why you believe that tests can "see."

generis that is a great explanation. Thank you for that! I wish I could give you way more kudos than just one

I feel much better about the answer "to see" instead of "that see".

Also, your last point is a good one. Luckily, it seems that for most Sentence Completion options, there are usually more than 1 reason for eliminating an option.

You're very welcome. I'm glad I could help. As I mentioned, I like your tenacity.

The first thing to get out of the way here is the difference between ‘whether’ and ‘if’.

We know that ‘whether’ presents a choice usually and ‘if’ presents a condition.

In this case, we want ‘whether’ because the intent is to see whether pigeons can be trained or not.

Now, let’s scan the options:

(A) to see whether pigeons can be trained to help find

(B) to see whether pigeons can be trained as help to find

(C) to see if pigeons can be trained for helping to find

(D) that see if pigeons are able to be trained in helping to find

(E) that see whether pigeons are able to be trained for help in finding

Eliminate Options B, C, D and E.

Option A is the best choice.

Hope this helps!

Experts, hello!

Within answer choice B, is the "as help to..." have a meaning error? Is it modifying "pigeons" in a way that says pigeons can be trained literally as "help," which wouldn't make any sense.

I think you're on to something here. When someone is trained AS a lawyer, that means that he/she trained to become a lawyer. So if you train a pigeon AS help, does that mean that the pigeons are meant to become help??

Note that this is a fairly old question and, thankfully, such minor idiomatic differences are rarely the only decision point on more recent SC questions.

I hope that helps a bit!

Here's the official explanation provided by the GMAC for this question:

This correct sentence clearly states the purpose of the test, to see whether pigeons can be trained, and the purpose of the training, to help find survivors. The sentence is concise and idiomatically correct.

Option A: Correct. This sentence concisely states both the purpose of the test and the purpose of the training.

Option B: As help to find is not the correct idiom

Option C: For helping to find is not the correct idiom; whether is preferred to if when there are only two alternatives

Option D: That see is ungrammatical; whether is preferred to if when there are only two alternatives; are able to be should be replaced by the concise can; in helping to find should be to help find

Option E: For helping in finding is not the correct idiom; are able to be should be replaced by the concise can

Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.