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.
Sep 1008:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 0812:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Sep 1001:00 AM EDT
-02:00 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
75%
(hard)
Question Stats:
43% (01:28) correct
57%
(01:35)
wrong
based on 12621
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
As an actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
(B) Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
(C) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors whose ranks included
(D) one of the most influential artists in the American theater was Stella Adler, who trained several generations of actors including
(E) one of the most influential artists in the American theater, Stella Adler, trained several generations of actors whose ranks included
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
(B) Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
(C) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors whose ranks included
(D) one of the most influential artists in the American theater was Stella Adler, who trained several generations of actors including
(E) one of the most influential artists in the American theater, Stella Adler, trained several generations of actors whose ranks included
Show SpoilerOfficial Guide Explanation
OA is C
I'm copying the OE from the book ...it's from the OG 11th Edition
The original sentence contains a number of modifiers, but not all of them are correctly expressed. The clause who trained describes Stella Adler, yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theatre rather than Adler. Replacing who trained with training corrects the error because the phrase training...modifies the whole preceding clause rather than the single preceding noun. Several generations of actors including shows the same error in reverse; including modifies the whole phrase, but the two actors named are not generations of actors. The more limiting whose ranks included (referring to actors) is appropriate here.
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/28/theater/books-of-the-times-votary-of-stanislavsky-and-champion-of-chekhov.html
As an actress and, most importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater. Through her classes, she trained several generations of actors, including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
I'm copying the OE from the book ...it's from the OG 11th Edition
The original sentence contains a number of modifiers, but not all of them are correctly expressed. The clause who trained describes Stella Adler, yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theatre rather than Adler. Replacing who trained with training corrects the error because the phrase training...modifies the whole preceding clause rather than the single preceding noun. Several generations of actors including shows the same error in reverse; including modifies the whole phrase, but the two actors named are not generations of actors. The more limiting whose ranks included (referring to actors) is appropriate here.
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/28/theater/books-of-the-times-votary-of-stanislavsky-and-champion-of-chekhov.html
As an actress and, most importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater. Through her classes, she trained several generations of actors, including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
Solving this question helps.
Taking a timed set of similar questions in
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →
is even better.
TommyWallach
Expert
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Last visit: 14 Nov 2011
Posts: 323
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Location: San Francisco
Expert reply
Posts: 323
Hey All,
While you all got to the write answer here, there are a lot of mistakes made in the explanations that I'd like to correct.
49. As an Actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert Deniro.
The category of this question is MODIFIERS, which are responsible for almost every error. We can recognize this simply by reading the original sentence. First, it starts with a prepositional modifier (as an actress...), and then we'd notice the "who trained", which is a modifier opened with a relative pronoun. The most important rule to remember for modifiers is that noun modifiers need to touch the thing they're modifying.
a.Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
PROBLEM: The first modifier is correct ("As an actress..." is touching "Stella Adler"). Unfortunately, the second modifier is incorrect. "Who trained several..." should be touching Stella Adler as well. Instead it's modifying "American theater", which doesn't make any sense.
b. Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
PROBLEM: The problem here is two-fold. First of all, our modifier gets odd here. If you take out the middle man "one of the most...", we end up with a sentence saying that "As an actress and a teacher of acting, Stella Adler trained several generations of actors." That doesn't make any sense. She only taught people as a teacher, not as an actress. Also, the "who include" is modifying incorrectly here.
Think about this sample sentence, "I have a lot of friends who include Dave and Jim." It sounds like my friends are including Dave and Jim (when they hang out together), rather than that Dave and Jim are two of my many friends.
c. Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors, whose ranks included
ANSWER: This fixes both problems I discussed in B.
d. One of the most influential artist in the American theater was Stella Adler, who trained several generations of actors including
PROBLEM: First, the opening modifier "As an actress" needs to be modifying Stella Adler, but now it's modifying "one of the most influential artists...". The "including" is also problematic, like "include" in b.
e. One of the most influential artist in the American theater, Stella Adler, trained several generations of actors whose ranks included
PROBLEM: Same as above in terms of modifier. Also makes the "trained" mistake that B made. The loss of the comma creates a lack of clarity, but NOT a run-on sentence (that's when you have independent clauses without a period or semicolon to separate them).
Hope that helps!
-tommy
While you all got to the write answer here, there are a lot of mistakes made in the explanations that I'd like to correct.
49. As an Actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert Deniro.
The category of this question is MODIFIERS, which are responsible for almost every error. We can recognize this simply by reading the original sentence. First, it starts with a prepositional modifier (as an actress...), and then we'd notice the "who trained", which is a modifier opened with a relative pronoun. The most important rule to remember for modifiers is that noun modifiers need to touch the thing they're modifying.
a.Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
PROBLEM: The first modifier is correct ("As an actress..." is touching "Stella Adler"). Unfortunately, the second modifier is incorrect. "Who trained several..." should be touching Stella Adler as well. Instead it's modifying "American theater", which doesn't make any sense.
b. Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
PROBLEM: The problem here is two-fold. First of all, our modifier gets odd here. If you take out the middle man "one of the most...", we end up with a sentence saying that "As an actress and a teacher of acting, Stella Adler trained several generations of actors." That doesn't make any sense. She only taught people as a teacher, not as an actress. Also, the "who include" is modifying incorrectly here.
Think about this sample sentence, "I have a lot of friends who include Dave and Jim." It sounds like my friends are including Dave and Jim (when they hang out together), rather than that Dave and Jim are two of my many friends.
c. Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors, whose ranks included
ANSWER: This fixes both problems I discussed in B.
d. One of the most influential artist in the American theater was Stella Adler, who trained several generations of actors including
PROBLEM: First, the opening modifier "As an actress" needs to be modifying Stella Adler, but now it's modifying "one of the most influential artists...". The "including" is also problematic, like "include" in b.
e. One of the most influential artist in the American theater, Stella Adler, trained several generations of actors whose ranks included
PROBLEM: Same as above in terms of modifier. Also makes the "trained" mistake that B made. The loss of the comma creates a lack of clarity, but NOT a run-on sentence (that's when you have independent clauses without a period or semicolon to separate them).
Hope that helps!
-tommy
Quote:
The first issue is that the phrase beginning with "who" is right next to "the American theater", and that doesn't really make sense. "The American theater" isn't a person, and it didn't train generations of actors. Sure, you could maybe argue that "who trained several generations of actors..." reaches back to modify the entire phrase "one of the most influential artists in the American theater", but that's far messier than just modifying "Stella Adler", who is actually the one who trained the actors. We can argue about whether this is definitively WRONG, but at the very least, we can do better than this.
The second issue is that "including" seems to modify "several generations of actors", and that doesn't really make sense: Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro are examples of actors, not "generations of actors." It's subtle -- and probably not the worst error we've ever seen on a GMAT SC question -- but it makes (A) worse than at least one of the alternatives below.
So we can get rid of (A).
Quote:
There's still a minor problem with the very last part of the underlined portion: "several generations of actors who include Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro" sounds OK, because those two fellows are examples of actors, but then why are we saying "generations of actors"? Brando and De Niro are examples of actors, not "generations of actors." And there's another problem: "include" is present tense, and it's hard to justify the use of present tense here when the other action related to the actors occurred in the past tense ("trained").
And if you aren't completely sold by that last paragraph, there's something else at the beginning of the sentence: "as an actress... Stella Adler... trained several generations of actors." No, she only "trained generations of actors" as a "teacher of acting" -- not "as an actress." Subtle and nasty. But (B) is out.
Quote:
That opening modifier makes sense now: "as an actress and... as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists..." Cool, that's great. The modifier "training several generations of actors..." also makes sense: it modifies the previous clause, telling us more about Stella Adler and her life as "one of the most influential artists in the American theater.
Superficially, that last part of the underlined portion looks wordy: "several generations of actors whose ranks included..." But adding the phrase "whose ranks included" actually makes the phrase clearer than in (A) or (B): Brando and De Niro were among the ranks of those generations of actors. Fair enough.
So we can keep (C).
Quote:
The underlined portion is preceded by "as an actress and... as a teacher of acting", a phrase that really needs to modify "Stella Adler." It's ridiculously indirect for that phrase to modify "one of the most influential artists in the American theater." So (D) is much less clear than (C) in that part of the sentence.
Plus, we have the same minor issue with the phrase "generations of actors including..." as we did in (A). See above for more on that issue.
So (D) is gone.
Quote:
(E) has the same problem as (D): the beginning of the sentence needs to modify "Stella Adler." More broadly, "Stella Adler" really needs to be the subject of the sentence, since she's the one that trained the generations of actors -- and it's an indirect mess to use "one of the most influential artists..." as the subject of the sentence.
So (E) is out, and (C) is the best option.
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @ www.gmatninja.com | YouTube | Articles | IG
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
Beginners' Guides: RC | CR | Complete Resource Compilations: RC | CR
YouTube LIVE webinars: all videos by topic + 24-hour marathon for Ukraine
Question Explanation Collections: RC | CR | SC
OA is C
I'm copying the OE from the book ...it's from the OG 11th Edition
The original sentence contains a number of modifiers, but not all of them are correctly expressed. The clause who trained describes Stella Adler, yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theatre rather than Adler. Replacing who trained with training corrects the error because the phrase training...modifies the whole preceding clause rather than the single preceding noun. Several generations of actors including shows the same error in reverse; including modifies the whole phrase, but the two actors named are not generations of actors. The more limiting whose ranks included (referring to actors) is appropriate here.
I'm copying the OE from the book ...it's from the OG 11th Edition
The original sentence contains a number of modifiers, but not all of them are correctly expressed. The clause who trained describes Stella Adler, yet a relative clause such as this one must be placed immediately after the noun or pronoun it modifies, and this clause follows theatre rather than Adler. Replacing who trained with training corrects the error because the phrase training...modifies the whole preceding clause rather than the single preceding noun. Several generations of actors including shows the same error in reverse; including modifies the whole phrase, but the two actors named are not generations of actors. The more limiting whose ranks included (referring to actors) is appropriate here.
Posts: 6,486
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 Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater because she trained several generations of actors whose ranks included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Grammatical Construction + Awkwardness/Redundancy
A: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro“; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro were individually a generation of actors that Stella Adler trained; the intended meaning is that Stella Adler trained many generations of actors, and these generations included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
B: This answer choice incorrectly places information that is important to the core meaning of the sentence – the fact that Stella Adler was “one of the most influential artists in the American theater“ – between two commas; please remember, information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
C: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrases “whose ranks included”, conveying the intended meaning – that Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater because she trained several generations of actors whose ranks included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro. Further, Option C avoids the grammatical construction error seen in Options B and E, as it places no information between commas. Additionally, Option C is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.
D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro“; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro were individually a generation of actors that Stella Adler trained; the intended meaning is that Stella Adler trained many generations of actors, and these generations included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro. Further, Option D uses the passive voice construction “one of the most influential artists in the American theater was Stella Adler,”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
E: This answer choice incorrectly places information that is important to the core meaning of the sentence – the fact that Stella Adler was “one of the most influential artists in the American theater“ – between two commas; please remember, information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
Hence, C is the best answer choice.
To understand the concept of "Extra Information Between Commas" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
kimmyg
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 Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater because she trained several generations of actors whose ranks included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Grammatical Construction + Awkwardness/Redundancy
A: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro“; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro were individually a generation of actors that Stella Adler trained; the intended meaning is that Stella Adler trained many generations of actors, and these generations included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
B: This answer choice incorrectly places information that is important to the core meaning of the sentence – the fact that Stella Adler was “one of the most influential artists in the American theater“ – between two commas; please remember, information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
C: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrases “whose ranks included”, conveying the intended meaning – that Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater because she trained several generations of actors whose ranks included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro. Further, Option C avoids the grammatical construction error seen in Options B and E, as it places no information between commas. Additionally, Option C is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.
D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro“; the construction of this phrase illogically implies that Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro were individually a generation of actors that Stella Adler trained; the intended meaning is that Stella Adler trained many generations of actors, and these generations included Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro. Further, Option D uses the passive voice construction “one of the most influential artists in the American theater was Stella Adler,”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
E: This answer choice incorrectly places information that is important to the core meaning of the sentence – the fact that Stella Adler was “one of the most influential artists in the American theater“ – between two commas; please remember, information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
Hence, C is the best answer choice.
To understand the concept of "Extra Information Between Commas" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________
General Discussion
Thank you for explaining the options, i was really confused between C and B, just one questions though: in your example about B (I have a lot of friends who include Dave and Jim.) if you substitute "who" for "including" would the sentence then clearly describe dave and jim as a part of the group, another question is the relative pronoun always ambiguous when it's referring to a genitive phrase( 's or <of phrase>).
TommyWallach
Expert
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Last visit: 14 Nov 2011
Posts: 323
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Location: San Francisco
Expert reply
Posts: 323
Hey Elevinty,
So I'm not 100% sure exactly what you meant here, but I'll try my best.
For your first question, I believe you were asking if the sentence said "I have a lot of friends including Dave and Jim", would that make sense. I would argue no, that the word "including" seems to be modifying friends, so it remains unclear if my friends make an effort to include Dave and Jim, or if the category I'm calling friends includes them. Much better to have some term like "ranks" to obliterate the confusion.
As for your other question, "Is the relative pronoun always ambiguous when referring to a possessive (I won't say genitive...you've been studying too much Latin, or German)?", I'm not sure what you mean. Perhaps is the sentence "The dog of John's whom I saw yesterday is pretty." You're saying that the "whom" phrase could be referring to John or Dog? Actually, we would consider that pretty clear, because "of John's" is a modifier, and John's is really just an adjective. I won't lie to you, it's still a little unclear, but I wouldn't cross it out for that reason, and I can't imagine the GMAT ever making a question contingent on JUST that issue. In this sentence, it's not a possessive issue so much as a meaning issue. There are two readings of "include", and we can't work out what MEANING is implied.
If that didn't answer your question, feel free to ask again!
-tommy
So I'm not 100% sure exactly what you meant here, but I'll try my best.
For your first question, I believe you were asking if the sentence said "I have a lot of friends including Dave and Jim", would that make sense. I would argue no, that the word "including" seems to be modifying friends, so it remains unclear if my friends make an effort to include Dave and Jim, or if the category I'm calling friends includes them. Much better to have some term like "ranks" to obliterate the confusion.
As for your other question, "Is the relative pronoun always ambiguous when referring to a possessive (I won't say genitive...you've been studying too much Latin, or German)?", I'm not sure what you mean. Perhaps is the sentence "The dog of John's whom I saw yesterday is pretty." You're saying that the "whom" phrase could be referring to John or Dog? Actually, we would consider that pretty clear, because "of John's" is a modifier, and John's is really just an adjective. I won't lie to you, it's still a little unclear, but I wouldn't cross it out for that reason, and I can't imagine the GMAT ever making a question contingent on JUST that issue. In this sentence, it's not a possessive issue so much as a meaning issue. There are two readings of "include", and we can't work out what MEANING is implied.
If that didn't answer your question, feel free to ask again!
-tommy
papillon86
Indeed (C). Good explanation, MBAhereIcome.
We do want "Stella" in the first part so that gets rid of (D) and (E).
We're left with (A), (B), and (C). (A) almost implies the "theater" who trained....- so the positioning of the word is not right.
(B) is close, but as noted above, "actors who include" implies that the list of people following that phrase belong to the several generations of actors. This is not the case. Now this phrasing might be common in everyday language, but for GMAT purposes that's not what we want.
The phrasing in (C) is better: "several generations of actors whose ranks included"
Posts: 4,475
kimmyg
I'm happy to respond.
The first thing I'll say is --- after the long introductory phrase before the underlined part, it's very natural to expect the name right away. Choice (D) & (E) are awkward in that they delay the name even further. Stella Adler is the focus of the sentence, the star of this particular sentence, so we want to get to her. Just as it wouldn't make sense to have a 3 hour movie in which we meet the star of the movie only in the last 30 minutes, so it doesn't make sense for the subject & focus of a sentence to be unnecessarily buried further & further in the sentence. That's one problem with (D) & (E). We will reject both of those.
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
Trainwreck modifier mistake!! The phrase beginning with "who" is an ordinary noun modifier, modifying the subject, Stella Adler. Noun modifiers much touch the noun they modifier. This is incorrect.
(B) Stella Adler, one of the most influential artists in the American theater, trained several generations of actors who include
Most of this is good, until the end. We get a weird shift in verb tense in the final verb --- everything in the sentence is past tense until we get to present test "include." Why is this last verb in the present tense? That simply doesn't make sense with the rest of the sentence. This is incorrect.
(C) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors whose ranks included
Brilliant! I have to say, as someone who regularly writes GMAT SC practice questions, I am always impressed by the brilliance of the folks at GMAC. This one is 100% correct. Unlike the "who" modifier in (A), the "training" modifier is a little more flexible ---- it can be thought of as modifying the entire independent clause, so it doesn't need to "touch" anything. The truly brilliant part is --- the sentence creates the expectation that the underlined section would end:
... several generations of actors, including ...
That would have been perfectly correct. Of course, if we just replaced the active participle "including" with the passive participle "included", that would be entirely incorrect:
...several generations of actors, included ...
Instead, the folks at GMAC came up with this very clever alternative:
...several generations of actors whose ranks included...
This is different from what one might have expected, but it's 100% correct. Here, the word "included" is not a participle, but a full bonafide verb, the verb of the clause beginning with "whose ranks." Because this structure was unexpected and less familiar, I see that many folks on this page rejected choice (C). That's the sign of a very well written question, if the correct answer is something that many people thing sounds wrong.
OA = (C)
laxieqv
I don't know whether laxieqv, who posted that comment 9 years ago, is still following this post, but just FYI, in the first Godfather movie, Marlon Brando plays the elderly father Vito Corleone, and in the following, Godfather II, Robert Di Nero (a generation younger than Brando), played the young Vito Corleone in the flashback portions. I highly recommend both of those movies as classics.
...Robert was born in 1943 ....Brando 1924 ....clearly they were from two different generations Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Hi mikemcgarry,
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
Trainwreck modifier mistake!! The phrase beginning with "who" is an ordinary noun modifier, modifying the subject, Stella Adler. Noun modifiers much touch the noun they modifier. This is incorrect.
Regarding the modifier 'who' in your explanation for choice 'A',I have some doubt.Please consider the below ex:
a box of nails,which is on the floor.In this case which refers to box and not nails.
So that means its not necessary to have 'which' adjacent to the noun its modifying.
another ex from OG:
Although she had been known as an effective legislator first in the Texas Senate and later in the United States House of Representatives, not until Barbara Jordan’s participation in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon in 1974 was she made a nationally recognized figure, as it was televised nationwide.
correct answer includes
later in the United States House of Representatives, Barbara Jordan did not become a nationally recognized figure until 1974, when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were
Here 'which' refers to the hearings.
So based on the above examples cant I say it is similar to 'who' too.
'who' need not be placed immediately after the noun its describing.so here who can still modify stella. Isnt it right?
Please correct me if I am wrong
Thank you
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
Trainwreck modifier mistake!! The phrase beginning with "who" is an ordinary noun modifier, modifying the subject, Stella Adler. Noun modifiers much touch the noun they modifier. This is incorrect.
Regarding the modifier 'who' in your explanation for choice 'A',I have some doubt.Please consider the below ex:
a box of nails,which is on the floor.In this case which refers to box and not nails.
So that means its not necessary to have 'which' adjacent to the noun its modifying.
another ex from OG:
Although she had been known as an effective legislator first in the Texas Senate and later in the United States House of Representatives, not until Barbara Jordan’s participation in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon in 1974 was she made a nationally recognized figure, as it was televised nationwide.
correct answer includes
later in the United States House of Representatives, Barbara Jordan did not become a nationally recognized figure until 1974, when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were
Here 'which' refers to the hearings.
So based on the above examples cant I say it is similar to 'who' too.
'who' need not be placed immediately after the noun its describing.so here who can still modify stella. Isnt it right?
Please correct me if I am wrong
Thank you
Posts: 4,475
kona
Dear Kona,
I'm happy to respond.
Here, we are running into the distinction of vital vs. non-vital modifiers (a.k.a restrictive vs. non-restrictive, or mission-critical vs. non-mission-critical). See:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... modifiers/
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/that-vs-which-on-the-gmat/
A vital noun modifier can come between a noun and an ordinary modifier. They constitute an important exception to the Modifier Touch Rule. A vital noun modifier is "vital" for establishing the identity of the noun. For example:
... a box of nails,which is on the floor.
In this sentence, "of nails" is a vital noun modifier, because without it, the "box" could be any generic box --- a shoe box, a match box, a tissue box, a refrigerator box, etc. We have no idea. We need "of nails" to tell us exactly what kind of box. Because "of nails" is a vital noun modifier, it can come between the noun "box" and the modifying clause starting with "which."
Similarly, in
.... when she participated in the hearings on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, which were televised nationwide.
In this sentence, "hearings" by itself would tell us nothing --- Congress has hearing all the time. If we add "on the impeachment", then it's a little more specific, although a few different figures have been up on possible impeachment charges in history, so this alone is not enough to guarantee the exact identify of the hearings. If we add the whole modifier, "on the impeachment of President Richard Nixon" --- OK, now we know exactly which hearings we are discussing. That entire phrase is necessary to establish the identity of the noun. It's a vital noun modifier, which means it can enjoy the privilege of coming between the noun "hearing" and the clause starting with "which". This is a valid exception to the Modifier Touch Rule.
BUT
Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including ...
Look at what comes between the noun "Stellla Adler" and the "who" clause: a verb and everything that follows the verb (that's called the "predicate"). We absolutely are not allowed to put a full bonafide verb or verb + predicate between a noun and its modifier. That is a grossly incorrect violation of the Modifier Touch Rule. That's why this answer choice should be taken out back and shot.
The Modifier Touch Rule is an important rule. It's not absolute, but it is important. We can't just shove any words we like between an noun and its modifier. The only thing we can put in there is a vital noun modifier that is essential for establishing the identity of the noun. This is a crucial distinction to understand for the GMAT SC.
Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Posts: 513
kimmyg
hi, all of you. I am a person failing on gmat for many years. and I do not stay here to say that something is bad. but I have to say that the explanation in og is wrong. this is vietnamese way of saying. in english, I should say, I do not think the explanation in og is right. which kind of saying is considered insulting depend on the culture you are in.
a similar sentence in og is " though it is called sea, lake on earth, covering..." . you pdf serch to find this question in og13. in this question, the explantion in og is also wrong. there is one smilar question in gmatprep, but I do not remember. we can find the similar question in gmatprep by using "find" fuction in pdf file of gmatprep question to find "which"
"which clause" touching the noun modified is prefered than "which clause"not touching. we choose touching "which clause" if the two choices are different only in placing, touching or not touching the noun modified. many tens questions in og and in The Economist and The newyorktime , contain "which clause" far from the noun modified. even e-gmat present an article of this pattern of modifier. you can find the article in this forum.
in short, we can not use touching rule of noun modifier to eliminate the wrong answer here. "which clause" conveys different meaning and "comma+doing convey different meaning. Ron in manhantan forum explained this problem in a similar question in gmatprep in the manhantan forum.
this question presents a situation, in which two grammatical choices are not illogic. we can not find grammatical error and logic error in both choices. similar question in gmatprep is "lighting in the home..."
which choice we choose.
I want the expert to jump into and help us.
Posts: 4,475
thangvietnam
Dear thangvietnam,
My friend, I am happy to respond.
First of all, keep in mind that the explanations in the OG are not ideal. The questions themselves have been rigorously tested over the course of decades and uniformly conform to the highest standards. By contrast, the explanations have not be tested, have not be vetted, have been subject to little or no feedback. They were NOT even written by the same people: questions in the OG were probably written 20 years ago, and explanations were probably written a couple years ago. Many of the explanations are OK, but some aren't. It's important to appreciate the tremendous difference in quality between the official questions and the official explanations.
Now, the issue of the Modifier Touch Rule is very tricky. The simple statement is that a noun modifier must touch the noun it modifiers. There are all sorts of exceptions to this rule. You can read a little about this here:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/modifiers- ... orrection/
I will introduce some terminology.
The noun-modifier that is the -ing form of a verb is called a participle.
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/participle ... -the-gmat/
Words such as "who," "which," "that," etc. are called relative pronouns, and they begin relative clauses.
Participles are particularly tricky, because they can be noun-modifies or they can modify a verb or an entire clause. Relative pronouns definitely cannot modify anything other than a noun. Also, even when both are acting as noun modifiers, the participles have a little more liberty. For example, if we have the structure
[subject][main verb][blah blah blah long phrase], [noun modifier] . . .
then if that noun modifier is a participle, this sound very natural, and it's grammatically & logically clear that it refers to the subject; but if the noun modifier in the same position is a relative clause, it sounds a bit awkward, especially if other nouns follow the main verb. If the [noun][verb] part is short and not followed by much, we can use a relative clause to modify the subject, but the longer the first phrase is, the more out of place the relative pronoun would sound.
Here's the question with choices (A) & (C).
As an actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
(A) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including
(C) Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, training several generations of actors whose ranks included
This is a very subtle point, and hard for non-native speakers to appreciate, but the structure in (C), [noun][verb][blah blah], "training," sounds so natural and clear, whereas something sounds a little off about (A).
Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Posts: 513
Thank you
there are many similar questions in og and gmatprep, one of them, "though called sea, covering...".
so, we need to find the clear reason to eliminate the choice A.
if we eliminate choice A without clear reason, we live on the luck.
business manager/leaders, who direct the big flow of money and human resourse do not live on luck.
thing over this question over and over again and come here again with better explanation to help us. dont walk away,
A is grammatical and contain no logic error. why A is wrong?
who can give us perfect explanation of this choice A will receive 3 usd from each of us, persons in the gmatprep forum. total amount could be 6000 usd. it is worth doing so
there are many similar questions in og and gmatprep, one of them, "though called sea, covering...".
so, we need to find the clear reason to eliminate the choice A.
if we eliminate choice A without clear reason, we live on the luck.
business manager/leaders, who direct the big flow of money and human resourse do not live on luck.
thing over this question over and over again and come here again with better explanation to help us. dont walk away,
A is grammatical and contain no logic error. why A is wrong?
who can give us perfect explanation of this choice A will receive 3 usd from each of us, persons in the gmatprep forum. total amount could be 6000 usd. it is worth doing so
Posts: 4,475
thangvietnam
Dear thangvietnam
My friend, with all due respect, I explained this already. First of all, (A) is not out-and-out wrong, but it is awkward enough and suspect enough to be wrong on the GMAT SC. I explained why it is awkward compared to (B). You will find all this in my previous post.
There is a subtle logic to what the GMAT is testing on the SC question. For those who understand SC well, it absolutely is not luck. I believe the problem is: you are taking for granted that, right now, at your current level of understanding, you should be able to have full understanding of why (B) is right and why (A) is wrong. There is a certain presumption in that. When you take for granted that you already know enough, you deprive yourself of the opportunity to learn. All true learning happens in a mindset of open-minded curiosity and the humility to realize that one is not done learning and growing.
Also, when you ask an expert for a "perfect explanation," in some sense, you are denying your own responsibility. Education is not something the GMAT experts do to you. Education is something you do to yourself, by yourself, and for yourself, with our support. With math, it's relatively easy to write an explanation that everyone will get, because all the rules can be stated. In grammar, folks are at different levels of intuition, difference levels of comfort with their "ear" for English grammar; therefore, no explanation is going to work for everyone. There is a much greater onus of responsibility on the student to develop his own skills. With all due respect, your own English writing basically communicates what you want to communicate, but it perfectly clear that it was written by a non-native. From your writing alone, it is clear that you have a great deal to learn before you can achieve mastery in GMAT SC: first, you need to master fluency in speaking and writing.
My friend, it is 100% impossible to master GMAT SC by assembling some collection of clear definable rules. Grammar is not math. In math, we can explicitly state all the rules. In grammar, we can't: we can state some of them, but not all of them. That's simply the nature of grammar. If you have learned a lot of rules, that's an excellent start, but to advance significantly from where you are, you need to read. You need to read English for an hour a day, every day, over and above any specific GMAT preparation. See this blog article:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2014/how-to-imp ... bal-score/
I don't know whether you are still studying for the TOEFL, but Magoosh has a TOEFL product that can help you. Here's the TOEFL blog:
https://magoosh.com/toefl/
and here's the intro to the product:
https://toefl.magoosh.com/subscribe/bas ... =FreeTrial
Once again, no combination of expert explanations can get you from where you are now to GMAT SC mastery. You have significant work you need to do. I will do whatever I can to support you in this process, but you need to take the responsibility for your own mastery of English.
Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
thangvietnam
Hi thangvietnam, with A, the sentence is:
As an actress and, more importantly, as a teacher of acting, Stella Adler was one of the most influential artists in the American theater, who trained several generations of actors including Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro.
What is who intended to modify? Well, clearly the intention is that who modifies Stella Adler.
Now notice that who cannot modify American theater, because as a relative pronoun, who cannot modify non-living things. However, there is another valid antecedent that who can modify: influential artists. In fact, influential artists is actually closer to who than is Stella Adler.
So, at the very least, there is a clear ambiguity in option A as to what who is modifying: influential artists or Stella Adler.
For the most part, ambiguity is a clear reason on GMAT, to eliminate an answer choice.
As Mike pointed out earlier, OG explanations do leave a lot to be desired.
_________________
Ashish
MBA-ISB Hyderabad, GMAT-99th percentile
www.EducationAisle.com
MBA-ISB Hyderabad, GMAT-99th percentile
www.EducationAisle.com
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85 
Posts: 3,004
I think most of us would say that A is out-and-out wrong. Mike, that's what you seem to say, too, on the previous page. Although there are exceptions to the touch rule, we can't have a noun modifier crossing over both the verb and subsequent modifiers to refer back to the main subject. Thangvietnam, I don't think you will find a single example of this.
As for C, "training" begins an adverbial modifier that correctly modifies the preceding clause ("Stella was . . . artists").
There's another flaw in A--the actors were not "including" Brando and DeNiro. Those two were included in the group of actors, but not in the actors themselves! (Brando was a pretty big guy--if he were hiding inside another actor, we'd be able to tell!) That's why we have the added word "ranks" in C or E, which are therefore the only viable options. Without "ranks," we are saying either that Brando & DeNiro are inside the other actors or (somewhat less absurdly) that the other actors are including B & D, as in a playground activity. Neither of these seems to be the intended meaning!
_________________
As for C, "training" begins an adverbial modifier that correctly modifies the preceding clause ("Stella was . . . artists").
There's another flaw in A--the actors were not "including" Brando and DeNiro. Those two were included in the group of actors, but not in the actors themselves! (Brando was a pretty big guy--if he were hiding inside another actor, we'd be able to tell!) That's why we have the added word "ranks" in C or E, which are therefore the only viable options. Without "ranks," we are saying either that Brando & DeNiro are inside the other actors or (somewhat less absurdly) that the other actors are including B & D, as in a playground activity. Neither of these seems to be the intended meaning!
_________________
Manhattan Prep Instructor from 2009-2025
DmitryFarber
Hello DmitryFarber, I thought "including" here is used in the sense of "such as". Is this not the case or is this not allowed?
Because I came across the usage of "including" in sentence below:
Bluegross musician Bill Monroe, whose repertory, views on musical collaboration, and vocal style influenced generations of bluegrass artists, also inspired many musicians, including Elvis Presley and Jerry Garcia, whose music differed significantly from his own.
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,004
You're right, we could use "including" that way. (And by the way, that Bill Monroe problem is a really good one!) However, we'd need to use a comma first, as the GMAT does in "Bill Monroe." When you put an -ing word directly after a noun (with no comma), it modifies the noun itself. With a comma, it can modify the preceding clause. (In this case, "Bill inspired musicians.")
I know. English is crazy. Next try learning Russian . . .
_________________
I know. English is crazy. Next try learning Russian . . .
_________________
Manhattan Prep Instructor from 2009-2025
DmitryFarber
Hello DmitryFarber, actually as per Ron's comment, on the link below, "including" is an exception. Further, he says that in "comma + including", "including X" will become a prepositional phrase that describes the stuff preceding the comma:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/the-32-species-that-make-up-the-dolphin-family-t6878.html
Now, in view of your post and Ron's, I am beginning to wonder what Ron means by "stuff":(.
Yes, I am indeed a non-native, but after a lot of effort, am beginning to gain quite a comfort level in Sentence Correction. However, sentences and exceptions such as these, slightly throw me off.
Moderators:
Announcements
How to Tell If Your GMAT Prep Resources Are Actually Helping You
Subscribe to GMAT Club for New Podcast Episodes, Debriefs, & Insightful Sessions on GMAT Preparation
Subscribe to GMAT Club for New Podcast Episodes, Debriefs, & Insightful Sessions on GMAT Preparation
Tuck at Dartmouth
AI at Dartmouth Tuck: How the School Is Preparing Leaders for the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.