GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 03 Aug 2020, 22:13

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 12 Nov 2003
Posts: 19
Location: New Jersey
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 26 Oct 2018, 00:56
20
161
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

69% (01:19) correct 31% (01:34) wrong based on 5872 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations

(B) that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations

(C) that flourished at the same time those had

(D) flourishing at the same time as those did

(E) flourishing at the same time as those were

The Official Guide for GMAT Review, 2015

Practice Question
Question No.: SC 89
Page: 688

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/09/24/science/progress-reported-in-struggle-to-save-imperiled-ruins.html

FOR thousands of years, the Indus River has brought the blessing of water for crops and the curse of destructive floods. But today the Indus River poses a new danger to the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as those in the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates and the Nile.

Moisture and salt deposits threaten to erode and destroy the remarkable Mohenjo Daro archeological excavation that has fascinated and awed scientists and visitors since its discovery under a giant mound of earth more than 60 years ago.

Attachment:

01.jpg [ 118.51 KiB | Viewed 22022 times ]

Attachment:

02.jpg [ 76.32 KiB | Viewed 21996 times ]

Originally posted by go2venkat on 29 May 2004, 04:23.
Last edited by Bunuel on 26 Oct 2018, 00:56, edited 4 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2014, 14:15
8
5
rajgurinder wrote:
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
(B) that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
(C) that flourished at the same time those had
(D) flourishing at the same time as those did
(E) flourishing at the same time as those were

Hi

I am confused at the application of ellipsis over here.
Though I am not able to justify with any grammatical rule, I constantly feel the correct answer should have been:-
that flourished at the same time as DID the civilizations

I perceive this sentence as if the "time" is being compared to "civilization"

Dear rajgurinder,
I'm happy to respond.

This, of course, is SC #89 in the OG13. You may find this blog helpful:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/dropping-c ... -the-gmat/
One of the hardest things about parallelism is what one can legitimately omit in the second branch, and figuring this out from sentence in which the omission has already happened.

Choice (A) gives perfectly correct parallelism. Part of what's confusing about this sentence is that the words "the site" is an appositive phrase, and the whole rest of the sentence modifies this phrase. For clarity, let's talk about the comparison directly, in its own sentence. The long way to say it would be:
The ancient Mohenjo-Daro civilization flourished at the same time that the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates flourished.
That version is perfectly grammatically correct, but because it's long and wordy, it never would be correct on the GMAT. A shorter and perfectly correct way to say this is:
The ancient Mohenjo-Daro civilization flourished at the same time as the the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates flourished
That is, in essence, the same structure as the OA above. Including the word "did" as you suggest would also be correct, only a little longer --- that's perfectly acceptable, but not necessary to make the sentence correct.

Think about it this way. Think about where the word "same" appears. It appears inside a prepositional phrase, "at the same time" ---- this prepositional phrase is an adverbial phrase, that is, a verb-modifier. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... d-clauses/
This suggests that the comparison is not between "time" and something else, but rather, that the comparison is between two verbs, both modified in the same way by the modifying phrase. For example:
A did X at the same time that B did Y.
If the two do the same action, it's redundant to say:
A did X at the same time that B did X
and much better to say
A did X at the same time as B.
The predicate, "did X", is the same, so it is dropped, and the comparison, the "same time", refers to the time of those two identical predicates.

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)
Manager
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 125
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2010, 23:59
98
1
42
Hi Guys-- besides the much-discussed comparison, did you catch the idiom they're testing you on? See explanations below.

Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the
Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an
ancient civilization that flourished at the same time
as the civilizations
in the Nile Delta and the river
valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.
(A) that flourished at the same time as the
civilizations
the civilizations
(C) that flourished at the same time those had
(D) flourishing at the same time as those did
(E) flourishing at the same time as those were

A. The comparison uses the idiom same X.... as Y. X is 'an ancient civilization', and Y is a 'the civilizations'-- a logical comparison. And what about tenses? How do we know that the past simple (flourished) is needed? The time modifier for the verb is "at the same time"; now, 'at' indicates a specific point in the past.

Note on ellipses in comparisons: As long as the verb of comparison is in the same tense for both items of comparison, you do not need to repeat the verb (you can but don't need to).

Ex. I ate dinner at the same time as my brother ('did'-- optional).
Ex. I eat as much as my brother ate ('ate'-- not optional) when he was on the football team.

B. The only error in B is the past perfect, "had flourished", for there is no indication that the flourishing had taken place before some other point in the past.

C. NOTE: THERE IS NOT 'AS'! Once you start with the word 'same' you must complete the idiom with 'as'. Second, every time you run into the words 'that'/'those' (or any pronoun for that matter) you must ask yourself 'that'/'those' what? Here, 'those' indicates 'those civilizations,' BUT THE WORD 'CIVILIZATIONS' (plural) IS NOT IN THE SENTENCE. So there is no referent for the pronoun.

D. Same as C

E. Same as C

Hope this helped!

-Sarai

If this helped, kindly give Kudos!
##### General Discussion
CEO
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 2890
Location: Singapore
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 09:31
5
4
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization (that flourished at the same time as the civilizations) in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
- 'that' introduces an essential modifier for the 'civilization' preceding the phrase. the use of past tense would make the mohenjo civilization exists in the same time as the civilizations in the nile and tigris/euphrates had

(B) that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
- 'past perfect' suggests the Mohenjo civilization died out before the civilizations in the Nilte delta and river valleys of tigris and euphrates

(C) that flourished at the same time those had
- 'those does not have a clear referent'

(D) flourishing at the same time as those did
- 'those' does not have a referent

(E) flourishing at the same time as those were
- 'those' does not have a referent

A it is.
Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 126
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Apr 2013, 03:41
2
1
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of Tigris and Euphrates.

a. that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
b. that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
c. that flourished at the same time those had
d. flourishing at the same time as those did
e. flourishing at the same time as those were

Just one query for option d,e- is it wrong to use present participle (flourishing) for something in happened in past or we can go ahead use that
whether D will be correct if i say:

flourishing at the same time as the civilizations

Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 241
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2013, 06:17
1
I have the same doubt regarding this question.

The OA is A, but I am not convinced.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations

It has to be:

(A) that flourished at the same time as did the civilizations

or Am I missing any grammar rule??

Director
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 670
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2013, 05:27
8
7
gmatter0913 wrote:
I have the same doubt regarding this question.

The OA is A, but I am not convinced.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations

It has to be:

(A) that flourished at the same time as did the civilizations

or Am I missing any grammar rule??

if this was the option then also it is not wrong:
(A) that flourished at the same time as did the civilizations

we can omit the verbs when the following condition are met:
1)we should have parallel construction involving verbs
2)verbs of both (or all if more than 2 structures are parallel) are exactly the same (in the same tense including)
3)omitting verb doesn't create ambiguity.

if above condition satisfy then we can omit the verb in ALL BUT the first.

coming to this question:
we have 2 parallel structure:
the site of an ancient civilization flourished
at the same time as
the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys flourished.
or
DID the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys

Now we can see all three condition are meeting.
so we can omit verb from 2nd parallel structure.
hope this much is clear.

similar simple example:
francis ran faster than xavier ran.
francis ran faster than xavier..
francis ran faster than did xavier.
francis ran faster than xavier did.

all the above 4 sentences are correct only thing is that 2 nd sentence is best

take another example when after removing verb sentence becomes ambiguous
the tycoon supported Jones
more than
anyone else supported jones.

first 2 conditions are satisfied ...lets remove the verb and check for ambiguity thing.

the tycoon supported Jones more than anyone else in the industry.

now here it is ambiguous.
how?
there can be 2 meanings.
1)the tycoon supported jones more than the tycoon supported anyone else
2)the tycoon supported jones more than anyone else supported jones.

now under these cases you are not going to OMIT the verbs.

hope it helps
_________________
When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...

learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment
Intern
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Posts: 19
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2014, 11:05
2
7
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
(B) that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
(C) that flourished at the same time those had
(D) flourishing at the same time as those did
(E) flourishing at the same time as those were

Hi

I am confused at the application of ellipsis over here.
Though I am not able to justify with any grammatical rule, I constantly feel the correct answer should have been:-
that flourished at the same time as DID the civilizations

I perceive this sentence as if the "time" is being compared to "civilization"
Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Posts: 60
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2014, 09:33
2
1
rajgurinder wrote:
I am confused at the application of ellipsis over here.
Though I am not able to justify with any grammatical rule, I constantly feel the correct answer should have been:-
that flourished at the same time as DID the civilizations

I perceive this sentence as if the "time" is being compared to "civilization"

Original sentence says:

ancient civilization flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

So, we have "civilization" before and after the comparison operator. Hence, that would be the thing that is being compared.

If the sentence was:

ancient civilization flourished at the same time as when human beings discovered fire.

Then the comparison would have been between "same time" and "when human beings discovered fire" (both indicators of "time", the way both are "civilizations" in option A).

With "did" or "flourished" as well, option A would be correct, but since the sentence is completely clear even without it, "did"/"flourished" is redundant.

Another example:

Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults.

Now this is a problematic sentence, because it could mean either of the following:
i) Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than to adults. In other words:
Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than children exhibit tendency to be susceptible to adults

or

ii) Children exhibit more tendency to be more susceptible to bronchitis than adults (exhibit tendency to susceptible to bronchitis).

So, in this case, since there is an ambiguity, we need to introduce "do"/"exhibit" after the comparison operator:
Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults do.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2014, 10:08
1
ayushman wrote:
rajgurinder wrote:
I am confused at the application of ellipsis over here.
Though I am not able to justify with any grammatical rule, I constantly feel the correct answer should have been:-
that flourished at the same time as DID the civilizations

I perceive this sentence as if the "time" is being compared to "civilization"

Original sentence says:

ancient civilization flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

So, we have "civilization" before and after the comparison operator. Hence, that would be the thing that is being compared.

If the sentence was:

ancient civilization flourished at the same time as when human beings discovered fire.

Then the comparison would have been between "same time" and "when human beings discovered fire" (both indicators of "time", the way both are "civilizations" in option A).

With "did" or "flourished" as well, option A would be correct, but since the sentence is completely clear even without it, "did"/"flourished" is redundant.

Another example:

Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults.

Now this is a problematic sentence, because it could mean either of the following:
i) Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than to adults. In other words:
Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than children exhibit tendency to be susceptible to adults

or

ii) Children exhibit more tendency to be more susceptible to bronchitis than adults (exhibit tendency to susceptible to bronchitis).

So, in this case, since there is an ambiguity, we need to introduce "do"/"exhibit" after the comparison operator:
Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults do.

Dear ayushman,
With all due respect, your example in the bronchitis sentence is not very good, only because the idea of a "tendency to be susceptible to adults" is nonsensical and meaningless. That phrase is unidiomatic and has no sensible meaning at all. Because of this, version (ii) is the only logical reading of the sentence, and thus there is no ambiguity in the original sentence.

I think you were searching more for a sentence such as this:
I like John more than Harry.
which could mean
(1) I like John more than I like Harry.
or
(2) I like John more than Harry likes John.

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)
Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Posts: 60
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2014, 19:19
mikemcgarry wrote:
I think you were searching more for a sentence such as this:
I like John more than Harry.
which could mean
(1) I like John more than I like Harry.
or
(2) I like John more than Harry likes John.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Oh that would be too simple:).

Question number 98, OG-13, option A:

Ranked as one of the most important of Europe's young playwrights, Franz Xaver Kroetz has written 40 plays; his works—translated into more than 30 languages—are produced more often than any contemporary German dramatist.

OE: A dramatist cannot be produced and cannot be compared to works.

Again, "dramatist can be produced" is a non-sensical interpretation, but OG rules out this option because of this interpretation.

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Feb 2014, 10:31
1
ayushman wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
I think you were searching more for a sentence such as this:
I like John more than Harry.
which could mean
(1) I like John more than I like Harry.
or
(2) I like John more than Harry likes John.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Oh that would be too simple:).

Question number 98, OG-13, option A:

Ranked as one of the most important of Europe's young playwrights, Franz Xaver Kroetz has written 40 plays; his works—translated into more than 30 languages—are produced more often than any contemporary German dramatist.

OE: A dramatist cannot be produced and cannot be compared to works.

Again, "dramatist can be produced" is a non-sensical interpretation, but OG rules out this option because of this interpretation.

Dear ayushman,
I'm happy to respond.

As always, this question from the OG is fantastic. The folks at GMAC are extraordinary at crafting these gems.

Part of what is intriguing about this sentence is the break created by the semicolon. Mr. Kroetz is the subject of the first half, and naively we might expect him to be the subject throughout, because he is ultimately the "doer" of everything discussed in this sentence. The first clause subtly creates the expectation that we will be comparing people. BUT, the comparison is ultimate not between people, but between plays, and plays are the subject of the second independent clause, the one that follows the semicolon. You are perfectly correct --- we absolutely cannot compare people to plays, and people most definitely are not "produced."
That's precisely why option (A) is trainwreck-wrong:
... his works .... are produced more often than any contemporary German dramatist.
To correct this ---
(a) we need to compare plays to plays --- we could say "plays of" or simply "those of"
(b) the word "any" without the word "other" creates a logical problem.
To see this logical problem, consider a simpler version, a comparison of people.
Franz Xaver Kroetz has published more than any contemporary German dramatist.
In that sentence, the grammar is correct, the parallelism is correct, but there's a grave logical problem. Mr. Kroetz is a contemporary German dramatist. If he has published more than any contemporary German dramatist, then "any contemporary German dramatist" includes himself, and we are saying that he publishes more than himself!! We avoid this mistake by including the word "other."
The OA, (D), fixes both of these problems:
(D) Ranked as one of the most important of Europe's young playwrights, Franz Xaver Kroetz has written 40 plays; his works—translated into more than 30 languages—are produced more often than those of any other contemporary German dramatist.
It would also be correct add the verb:
Ranked as one of the most important of Europe's young playwrights, Franz Xaver Kroetz has written 40 plays; his works—translated into more than 30 languages—are produced more often than are those of any other contemporary German dramatist.
Including that verb is perfectly fine, but absolutely unnecessary, because the parallelism is 100% clear without it.

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)
Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Posts: 60
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2014, 06:19
Hello Mike, all that you mention makes sense.

But perhaps the intent of my citing this OG question was not very clear in my post.

In my original posted, I had posted a sentence:

Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults.

What you had suggested in your post was that this sentence "cannot" be interpreted as: Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than (to) adults, since this would be meaningless.

I then posted Mr. Kroetz example from OG to illustrate that OG interprets option A as "dramatist can be produced", despite the fact that this interpretation is meaningless. On this basis, OG regards A as incorrect.

Hope I was able to explain my intent of citing the example of Mr. Kroetz.

By the way, coming back to my example: Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults, it struck me tht there actually are more than one ways to fix it:

i) Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults do...or.
ii) Children exhibit more tendency than adults to be susceptible to bronchitis.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4488
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2014, 11:40
1
ayushman wrote:
Hello Mike, all that you mention makes sense.

But perhaps the intent of my citing this OG question was not very clear in my post.

In my original posted, I had posted a sentence:

Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults.

What you had suggested in your post was that this sentence "cannot" be interpreted as: Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than (to) adults, since this would be meaningless.

I then posted Mr. Kroetz example from OG to illustrate that OG interprets option A as "dramatist can be produced", despite the fact that this interpretation is meaningless. On this basis, OG regards A as incorrect.

Hope I was able to explain my intent of citing the example of Mr. Kroetz.

By the way, coming back to my example: Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults, it struck me tht there actually are more than one ways to fix it:

i) Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults do...or.
ii) Children exhibit more tendency than adults to be susceptible to bronchitis.

Dear ayushman,
It seems to me you are trying to fix something that doesn't need to be fixed. The sentence:
Children exhibit more tendency to be susceptible to bronchitis than adults.
exhibits no logical problems with respect to the comparison. The comparison is already 100% clear, and nothing needs to be fixed. That sentence is awkward and unidiomatic. The phrasing "exhibit more tendency" is a very indirect and awkward way of phrasing this. It would be far more direct to say:
Children tend to be more susceptible to bronchitis than adults.
or simply
Children are more susceptible to bronchitis than adults.
That sentence also has a 100% clear comparison. There is absolutely no problem. We could add a verb at the end "than adults do" ---- that's not necessary, but some people would choose to add it for clarity. The sentence is 100% correct either with or without that verb at the end. Does 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)
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 3105
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy. Ellipsis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Feb 2014, 01:16
1
rajgurinder wrote:
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

(A) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
(B) that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
(C) that flourished at the same time those had
(D) flourishing at the same time as those did
(E) flourishing at the same time as those were

Hi

I am confused at the application of ellipsis over here.
Though I am not able to justify with any grammatical rule, I constantly feel the correct answer should have been:-
that flourished at the same time as DID the civilizations

I perceive this sentence as if the "time" is being compared to "civilization"

Hi there,

Ellipsis only creates problems when it leads to ambiguity in the intended meaning of the sentence. "Civilization" and "time" are not parallel entities in this context, since this comparison isn't logical. So, it's perfectly fine to leave out the verb. The writer means to say that all the civilizations referred to in the sentence flourished at the same time. This meaning comes through without any ambiguity in the original sentence.

I hope this helps to clarify your doubt!

Regards,
Meghna
_________________
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 241
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Mar 2014, 04:36
1
1
'As' is indeed followed by a clause. The subject and verb of the clause are:

subject is: the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates
verb is: did

the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates did

The verb is implied because it is in ellipsis.

Also, please note that 'As' need not be followed by a clause always. 'As' can be used as a conjunction or as a preposition.
If we use 'As' as a preposition, then you don't need to follow it with a clause. (this sentence itself is an example)

Ex: I think of you as my friend.
Ex: As a child, I always wanted to be a pilot.
----------------------------------------------------------
Press +1 Kudos if this helped you.
Intern
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
Posts: 29
Location: India
Schools: ISB '18 (D)
GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V28
GRE 1: Q165 V159
GPA: 3.1
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2016, 12:21
How is "that" in "the site of an ancient civilization that" modifying "civilization"? "of an ancient civilization" is a propositional phrase thus i thought "that" is modifying "site".

Why is this understanding incorrect?
_________________
What gets measured, gets managed
SVP
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 1981
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2017, 22:44
pranav6082 wrote:
How is "that" in "the site of an ancient civilization that" modifying "civilization"? "of an ancient civilization" is a propositional phrase thus i thought "that" is modifying "site".

Why is this understanding incorrect?

Hi pranav6082, this entire concept of propositional phrase needs to be applied only in a given clause. Notice there that the following are separate clauses:

i) Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization
- Notice that propositional phrase of an ancient civilization appears as part of this clause

ii) that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.
- This is a separate clause (a relative/dependent clause)

So, you can't mix and match the two clauses. that (appearing in the second clause) will just follow the normal rule of what that can modify, in this case civilization.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses this concept of propositional phrase, its application and examples in significant detail. Have attached the corresponding section of the book, for your reference.
Attachments

One of the mysteries_5.pdf [20.92 KiB]

_________________
Thanks,
Ashish
GMAT-99th Percentile, MBA - ISB Hyderabad
EducationAisle Online GMAT Classes

Sentence Correction Nirvana available on Amazon.in and Flipkart

Join us for a free GMAT Live Online Class from anywhere in the world
Intern
Joined: 18 May 2015
Posts: 21
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2019, 10:41
BukrsGmat wrote:
Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of Tigris and Euphrates.

a. that flourished at the same time as the civilizations
b. that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations
c. that flourished at the same time those had
d. flourishing at the same time as those did
e. flourishing at the same time as those were

Just one query for option d,e- is it wrong to use present participle (flourishing) for something in happened in past or we can go ahead use that
whether D will be correct if i say:

flourishing at the same time as the civilizations

I omitted options D and E based on the ing form - meaning flourishing is happening now (this doesnt make any sense). Is this correct?
SVP
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 1981
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2019, 21:25
oa7 wrote:
I omitted options D and E based on the ing form - meaning flourishing is happening now (this doesnt make any sense). Is this correct?

Hi oa7, that is not correct.

Flourishing is a present participle and does not have a tense of its own.

For example:

Country X is flourishing.
- The sentence uses present participle flourishing and the sentence is in present tense.

Country X was flourishing.
- The sentence uses present participle flourishing but the sentence is in past tense.

In other words, the presence of flourishing is not impacting the tense of the sentence.
_________________
Thanks,
Ashish
GMAT-99th Percentile, MBA - ISB Hyderabad
EducationAisle Online GMAT Classes

Sentence Correction Nirvana available on Amazon.in and Flipkart

Join us for a free GMAT Live Online Class from anywhere in the world
Re: Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excava   [#permalink] 18 Nov 2019, 21:25

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 24 posts ]