Last visit was: 12 Jul 2025, 09:56 It is currently 12 Jul 2025, 09:56
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,346
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,847
Own Kudos:
8,635
 [3]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,847
Kudos: 8,635
 [3]
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
Valyria
Joined: 08 Aug 2020
Last visit: 23 May 2022
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 5
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,055
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Valyria
Here, the first part states 'Frances Perkins’ investigations', and then the second part goes as 'her lobbying', so isn't it that the pronoun 'her' is being used as a pronoun for 'Frances Perkins’ investigations' rather than for Frances Perkins.
Hi Valyria,

Both her and Frances Perkins’ are possessives. However, we should not worry too much about this issue.
avatar
Sajal12
Joined: 15 Jun 2021
Last visit: 06 Aug 2022
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Location: India
GPA: 3.94
WE:Analyst (Consulting)
Posts: 12
Kudos: 9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi experts,

I read through the replies but I was not able to find why anyone didn't ask the question of her referring to possessive Frances Perkins, how can "her" refer to possessive Frances Perkins?
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,055
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sajal12
Hi experts,

I read through the replies but I was not able to find why anyone didn't ask the question of her referring to possessive Frances Perkins, how can "her" refer to possessive Frances Perkins?
Hi Sajal12,

What is the rule you're trying to apply here (both her and Frances Perkins’ are possessives)?
avatar
Sidharth003
Joined: 10 Feb 2020
Last visit: 08 Mar 2025
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 708
GMAT 1: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 1: 770 Q49 V47
Posts: 21
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How can we use "her"? Shouldn't this qualify as a pronoun error as the antecedent is Perkins' investigations and not Perkins herself?
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,055
 [2]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,055
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sidharth003
How can we use "her"? Shouldn't this qualify as a pronoun error as the antecedent is Perkins' investigations and not Perkins herself?
Hi Sidharth003,

Are you thinking about the "a possessive noun can't be the antecedent for a subject or object pronoun" rule? That "rule" is a problematic one, at best.

Quick recap:
1. Clinton's experience worked against her.Her is an object pronoun here.
is the same as
2. Clinton's experience worked against Clinton.

3. Clinton's experience ended up weakening her candidature.Her is a possessive pronoun here.
is the same as
4. Clinton's experience ended up weakening Clinton's candidature.

Some (very few!) people think that sentence 1 is not possible, but even they wouldn't have a problem with sentence 3.

5. So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform...Her is a possessive pronoun here ("her lobbying").

Here, Frances Perkins’ is a possessive (notice the apostrophe) and investigations is what we are really talking about (her investigations). It's the same thing with her lobbying. The her that we see before lobbying is the possessive her, not the object her.

Important: Even though that "rule" hasn't been broken here, we should try not to apply it, as there just isn't enough evidence that the GMAT follows it.
User avatar
Crytiocanalyst
Joined: 16 Jun 2021
Last visit: 27 May 2023
Posts: 951
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 309
Posts: 951
Kudos: 202
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ceratin key points has to be kept in mind presistence should be for her lobbying
(A) and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent,
this isn't right meaning she was continously presistent not infrequent presistance

(B) and lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, so that
Similar issue as A and so that provides ambigious meaning

(C) her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent, that
i[color=#f26c4f] went with my year for eleminating this i know how much Gnat plays with ear i haveno better reasoning as A [/color]

(D) lobbying for wage and hour reform was so persistent,
Tis was the closest runner up investigation was not lobyied for hence i eleminated

(E) so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that
It nails the meaning and correct use of so
hence IMO E
User avatar
sonalchhajed2019
Joined: 06 Apr 2018
Last visit: 29 May 2023
Posts: 115
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 336
Location: India
Schools: ISB '23 (S)
GMAT 1: 560 Q43 V23
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.64
Products:
Schools: ISB '23 (S)
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37
Posts: 115
Kudos: 28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
EMPOWERgmatVerbal
EducationAisle
AjiteshArun

Please help me with Answer Options C, D, and E. I have posted my reasons but I am not sure. I am struggling with the concept of ellipsis. Please suggest resources that can help in address the issue.

So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

Quote:
(A) and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent,
We have a parallelism marker here "and". Hence we should have 2 elements that are parallel to each other.
Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry ( Noun Phrase) and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, (Clause). These two are not parallel to each other. Also, we need "that" in the sentence. For these 2 reasons A is incorrect.

Quote:
(B) and lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, so that
Here again we have a Parallelism marker "and". So we should have 2 elements that are parallel to each other. Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry ( Noun Phrase) and lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent (Maybe this is a clause. I am not sure. The subject is missing). But clearly, this is not parallel. Also, the use of "so that" seems incorrect here. We use "so that" order that to talk about purpose. And hence the use of "so that" changes the meaning.

(
Quote:
C) her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent, that
How are these two elements connected together?
So dogged were 1. Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry,
2. her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent
There is no connector (and) here.

Please help me understand the exact issue in Option C.



Quote:
(D) lobbying for wage and hour reform was so persistent,
How are these two elements connected together?
So dogged were 1. Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry,
2. lobbying for wage and hour reform was so persistent,
Incorrect because missing "that". Also, the main two parts of the sentence are not connected to each other. Please let me know whether my reasoning is correct.

Quote:
(E) so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that
"so dogged.....so persistent...., that..."
I did not almost realize that ellipsis is at play in Option E. Please help me understand how is the ellipsis correct in Option E.

I understand the question is testing the concept of Parallelism and the use of the idiom "So x that Y"
avatar
sidship21
Joined: 12 Mar 2016
Last visit: 19 Mar 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 305
Posts: 15
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
EMPOWERgmatVerbal
EducationAisle
AjiteshArun

Hi Experts
My doubt is around the use of ellipsis. In the sentence below, since 'were' is not present in the preceding portion of the sentence, is it ok to avoid using 'were' just on the basis that 'was' i.e. the singular version of 'were' is mentioned in the preceding portion? In other words, or more generally, is is the concept of ellipsis not dependent on verb number (singular or plural) as long as the verb implied is the same?

Thank you

Of all the wild animals in their area, none was more useful to the Delaware tribes than the Virginia white- tailed deer: it was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its antlers and bones were used for tools, and its sinews and gut were used for bindings and glue.
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,055
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,055
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sidship21
My doubt is around the use of ellipsis. In the sentence below, since 'were' is not present in the preceding portion of the sentence, is it ok to avoid using 'were' just on the basis that 'was' i.e. the singular version of 'were' is mentioned in the preceding portion? In other words, or more generally, is is the concept of ellipsis not dependent on verb number (singular or plural) as long as the verb implied is the same?
Hi sidship21,

Both you and sonalchhajed2019 have asked some really good questions. Ellipsis is a vast topic, and I can't claim to understand it (I've tried!), but I'll try my best to answer your questions.

1. Some of the posts on ellipsis on GMAT Club address extremely strict ellipsis, where the words that are understood must be present in the sentence in exactly the same form. We need to understand that this is just a subset of ellipsis.

2. Similarly, what you see in your example is also a subset of ellipsis where separate (but similar) elements are joined while omitting a word in the element(s) after the first. That word is usually a verb, as it is in your example. Once the first element is out of the way, the word(s) omitted in the other elements do not need to agree with the one in the initial element.

3. The "missing" and is something we've seen in other GMAT questions as well. There are some good posts in that thread on that topic.
User avatar
sonalchhajed2019
Joined: 06 Apr 2018
Last visit: 29 May 2023
Posts: 115
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 336
Location: India
Schools: ISB '23 (S)
GMAT 1: 560 Q43 V23
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.64
Products:
Schools: ISB '23 (S)
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37
Posts: 115
Kudos: 28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thank you for your reply. As you correctly pointed out the topic of ellipsis is quite difficult to understand.

I am also realizing that as I move towards the higher difficulty questions I am coming across a lot of expectations. ( I have read in a lot of posts - That most of the grammar stuff posted that we consider as rules are not rules but rather preferences. )

And for these higher-level questions, we have to rely on meaning. But I find it very difficult to understand the intended meaning. This topic of meaning is very subtle.

Can you suggest how can I get better at this? And what to do in the questions where the standard rules (preferences) do not apply. I am sure even after studying all the Official Questions there will be quite a number of exceptions to the standard preferences that I would not know about.

Please guide. AjiteshArun Thank you for all your explanations.


AjiteshArun
sidship21
My doubt is around the use of ellipsis. In the sentence below, since 'were' is not present in the preceding portion of the sentence, is it ok to avoid using 'were' just on the basis that 'was' i.e. the singular version of 'were' is mentioned in the preceding portion? In other words, or more generally, is is the concept of ellipsis not dependent on verb number (singular or plural) as long as the verb implied is the same?
Hi sidship21,

Both you and sonalchhajed2019 have asked some really good questions. Ellipsis is a vast topic, and I can't claim to understand it (I've tried!), but I'll try my best to answer your questions.

1. Some of the posts on ellipsis on GMAT Club address extremely strict ellipsis, where the words that are understood must be present in the sentence in exactly the same form. We need to understand that this is just a subset of ellipsis.

2. Similarly, what you see in your example is also a subset of ellipsis where separate (but similar) elements are joined while omitting a word in the element(s) after the first. That word is usually a verb, as it is in your example. Once the first element is out of the way, the word(s) omitted in the other elements do not need to agree with the one in the initial element.

3. The "missing" and is something we've seen in other GMAT questions as well. There are some good posts in that thread on that topic.
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 3,874
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,874
Kudos: 3,573
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sidship21
Of all the wild animals in their area, none was more useful to the Delaware tribes than the Virginia white- tailed deer: it was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its antlers and bones were used for tools, and its sinews and gut were used for bindings and glue.
While this does not seem to be an official question, singular/plural is not an issue with ellipsis.

For example, following would be correct:

Peter is better off than his brothers.

This is equivalent to:

Peter is better off than his brothers (are).
avatar
sidship21
Joined: 12 Mar 2016
Last visit: 19 Mar 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 305
Posts: 15
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks a lot AjiteshArun and EducationAisle !
User avatar
vamkrispk
Joined: 14 Nov 2013
Last visit: 09 Jul 2025
Posts: 271
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 168
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Sustainability
GRE 1: Q158 V155
GRE 2: Q163 V159
GRE 3: Q163 V159
GPA: 7.32
WE:Corporate Finance (Finance: Diversified Financial Services)
Products:
GRE 1: Q158 V155
GRE 2: Q163 V159
GRE 3: Q163 V159
Posts: 271
Kudos: 56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
So dogged were her investigations of the garment industry, and so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that she was first recruited by Gov. Al Smith, and later by Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt, to work within New York State government, rather than against it.

excerpt from NYT article

Option E should have had an 'And'.
Weird question.

Answered it wrong anyways. Didn't expect it from an OG source.

Request moderators to lock this question.
User avatar
debojyoti25
Joined: 04 Jan 2022
Last visit: 10 Jan 2025
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 5
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How I tackled this question :

So dogged were FP's investigation -- Inverted Sentence
The next part should also be in sync. It should not be direct

Moreover, So X That Y is clear from the statement. Now break it in C vs E. C is direct and not goes with the structure of the sentence



goalsnr
So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

(A) and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent,

(B) and lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, so that

(C) her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent, that

(D) lobbying for wage and hour reform was so persistent,

(E) so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,486
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,486
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
goalsnr
So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

(A) and her lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent,

(B) and lobbying for wage and hour reform was persistent, so that

(C) her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent, that

(D) lobbying for wage and hour reform was so persistent,

(E) so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that
We see that the first nonunderlined portion is the following:

So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry,

That wording is an inverted version of the following:

Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry were so dogged,

We can now tell that what follows must at some point include a "that," so that we have.

Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry were so dogged ... that ....

or as we see in the question

So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry ... that ....

Scanning the sentence versions, we see that only (B), (C), and (E) include "that." So, we can eliminate (A) and (D).

The next thing that we can use to eliminate a choice is "so that" in (B).

Notice that neither of the following make sense.

Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry were so dogged ... so that Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry ... so that Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

We don't need a second "so." Thus, the "so" in "so that" has no logical function and makes the (B) version illogical.

We are left with (C) and (E).

Here are the (C) and (E) versions.

(C) version: So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent, that Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.

(E) version: So dogged were Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry, so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government, rather than as a social worker.


In the (C) version, we have an absolute phrase, "her lobbying for wage and hour reform persistent." That phrase should modify the clause that appears before it, but notice that the fact that "her lobbying for wage and hour reform" was "persistent" is a different topic from the topic of how dogged her investigations were. So, it doesn't make sense for that absolute phrase to modify that clause.

In contrast, in the (E) version, "so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform" expresses a SECOND REASON why "Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government."

So, we have two reasons, Francis Perkins' investigations were so dogged and her lobbying was so persistent, why Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government.

Now, (E) may seem odd because there's no verb in "so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform." However, that wording is OK because the "was" is understood. In other words, "were" in the first clause is understood to be repeated as "was" in the second clause even though "was" is not written.

So, the beginning of the (E) version is basically the equivalent of the following:

Frances Perkins’ investigations of the garment industry were so dogged, and her lobbying for wage and hour reform were so persistent

We don't need "and" or a second verb though because of how the (E) version is written in the question.

Thus, the correct answer is (E).

Yes, the (E) version uses types of wording we're not accustomed to seeing, but the clear errors in all the other versions force us to consider (E) and see that perhaps it works even without "and" or a verb in the second clause.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts