Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 08:41 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 08:41
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
505-555 Level|   Meaning/Logical Predication|   Modifiers|                     
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [3]
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: 5,579
 [3]
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 15 Dec 2020, 11:53
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
samgyupsal
Hello experts, MartyTargetTestPrep, GMATNinja, AjiteshArun, egmat

I have some doubts about answer choice C. What are the primary points wrong with it? Based on my analysis and the above, it seems there are three errors: (1) "studying skeletons" seems to illogically suggest there are type of skeletons (i.e., skeletons that are studying); (2) "being able" I always get tripped with "being," but I don't believe I ever seen it used correctly as a modifier; (3) "this" is too far away from its antecedent - "DNA evidence" (also is the use of "this" along as a pronoun always too colloquial for the GMAT?)

Thank you in advance!
Show more
"From studying skeletons" does indeed convey that the scientists recovered DNA "from" a certain type of skeletons, "studying skeletons." If the sentence said, "by studying skeletons," it would make sense.

The problem with "Scientists recovered DNA evidence ..., being able to deduce from this" is that it seems to convey that the reason why the scientists were able to recover DNA evidence is that they are able to deduce something from it. Of course this meaning does not make sense.

Finally, "this" is not ideal. "This" is used for pointing out a specific noun. "It" would be a more logical pronoun for referring to the DNA evidence.
avatar
psls
avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2021
Last visit: 12 Dec 2023
Posts: 32
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 131
Posts: 32
Kudos: 9
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 17 Apr 2021, 22:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear Experts,

GMATNinja AjiteshArun egmat


Please help clarify my doubt about MOD between (A) and (B).

Quote:
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this that an epidemic of malaria struck in the empire’s waning days.

(A) Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this
(B) In studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this
Show more

In OG explanations, (A)Studying..., and (B)In studying..., modify "DNA evidence"

I understand that (A)Studying..., is a cause-effect MOD that must modify subject "DNA evidence".
But I don't understand why (B)In studying..., -- which is preposition MOD -- modifies "DNA evidence". Instead, it should modify entire sentence "DNA evidence was recovered by scientists".

P.S. I eliminated (B), because it uses "In studying" instead of "By studying", but I'm not sure whether I did in correct way.

Please help!

Many thanks,
-tor
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [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: 5,080
 [1]
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 18 Apr 2021, 21:11
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TorGmatGod
Dear Experts,

GMATNinja AjiteshArun egmat


Please help clarify my doubt about MOD between (A) and (B).

Quote:
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this that an epidemic of malaria struck in the empire’s waning days.

(A) Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this
(B) In studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this

In OG explanations, (A)Studying..., and (B)In studying..., modify "DNA evidence"

I understand that (A)Studying..., is a cause-effect MOD that must modify subject "DNA evidence".
But I don't understand why (B)In studying..., -- which is preposition MOD -- modifies "DNA evidence". Instead, it should modify entire sentence "DNA evidence was recovered by scientists".

P.S. I eliminated (B), because it uses "In studying" instead of "By studying", but I'm not sure whether I did in correct way.

Please help!

Many thanks,
-tor
Show more
Hi TorGmatGod,

Your understanding of B is correct, but the same thing applies to option A. DNA evidence is the subject (not mentioned) in the opening modifier, and studying... modifies the entire clause in the first option. However, we still need a noun that makes sense with studying..., so we must remove option A.

In other words, the modifiers you see in options A and B are very similar, in the sense that they both modify clauses and they both need a "logical noun" as the subject of the clause that comes after them.
User avatar
rahul2013
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Last visit: 21 Jul 2021
Posts: 32
Own Kudos:
33
Given Kudos: 142
Location: United States
Schools: IIMA PGPX'22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: IIMA PGPX'22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
Posts: 32
Kudos: 33
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 19 Jul 2021, 18:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. Modf issue : "Studying…" must modify Scientist ; "from this" is unnecessary
B. same as A
C. Meaning issue - evidence from studying ….evidence was collected based on analysis ; being able to deduced modifies what?
D. logical antecedent of "they" is Scientist(gramatically can refer to Skeletons) - Non-deterministic; "it" logically refers to "evidence" ; meaning issue - unearthing of evidence didn’t help the scientist in deducing it was the studyng of skeletons
E. Correct
User avatar
woohoo921
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 516
Own Kudos:
142
Given Kudos: 623
Posts: 516
Kudos: 142
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 02 Nov 2022, 20:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyTargetTestPrep
samgyupsal
Hello experts, MartyTargetTestPrep, GMATNinja, AjiteshArun, egmat

I have some doubts about answer choice C. What are the primary points wrong with it? Based on my analysis and the above, it seems there are three errors: (1) "studying skeletons" seems to illogically suggest there are type of skeletons (i.e., skeletons that are studying); (2) "being able" I always get tripped with "being," but I don't believe I ever seen it used correctly as a modifier; (3) "this" is too far away from its antecedent - "DNA evidence" (also is the use of "this" along as a pronoun always too colloquial for the GMAT?)

Thank you in advance!
"From studying skeletons" does indeed convey that the scientists recovered DNA "from" a certain type of skeletons, "studying skeletons." If the sentence said, "by studying skeletons," it would make sense.

The problem with "Scientists recovered DNA evidence ..., being able to deduce from this" is that it seems to convey that the reason why the scientists were able to recover DNA evidence is that they are able to deduce something from it. Of course this meaning does not make sense.

Finally, "this" is not ideal. "This" is used for pointing out a specific noun. "It" would be a more logical pronoun for referring to the DNA evidence.
Show more



KarishmaB

For Choice E, I had a question on "deduce that." I have seen many verbs on the GMAT be accompanied by "that" after. It has become common convention to prefer "that" after verbs because it adds a level of specificity from my understanding of the usage?

The classic example that Manhattan Prep offers is something along the lines of: "I know Kayne West is a musician" = you personally know Kayne vs. "I know that Kayne West is a musician" = you know of Kayne and that he is a musician.

An example that confuses me: "I believe she will win" vs "I believe that she will win" --> why is the "that" needed?

So, essentially, when is the "that" not necessary?

• Similarly on this question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/by-using-a-p ... 45196.html I am not sure why "that" is omitted after "sounds". I realize that this is in the non-underlined portion of the question, but I would have expected to see a "that" after sounds to be "By using a process called echolocation to analyze the echoes of the high-pitched sounds THAT they produce."

• And on this question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/seismologist ... 93426.html why would you need to say "signals THAT WERE detected"?

Thank you again for being a rockstar :)
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
 [1]
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 10 Nov 2022, 21:45
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
woohoo921
MartyTargetTestPrep
samgyupsal
Hello experts, MartyTargetTestPrep, GMATNinja, AjiteshArun, egmat

I have some doubts about answer choice C. What are the primary points wrong with it? Based on my analysis and the above, it seems there are three errors: (1) "studying skeletons" seems to illogically suggest there are type of skeletons (i.e., skeletons that are studying); (2) "being able" I always get tripped with "being," but I don't believe I ever seen it used correctly as a modifier; (3) "this" is too far away from its antecedent - "DNA evidence" (also is the use of "this" along as a pronoun always too colloquial for the GMAT?)

Thank you in advance!
"From studying skeletons" does indeed convey that the scientists recovered DNA "from" a certain type of skeletons, "studying skeletons." If the sentence said, "by studying skeletons," it would make sense.

The problem with "Scientists recovered DNA evidence ..., being able to deduce from this" is that it seems to convey that the reason why the scientists were able to recover DNA evidence is that they are able to deduce something from it. Of course this meaning does not make sense.

Finally, "this" is not ideal. "This" is used for pointing out a specific noun. "It" would be a more logical pronoun for referring to the DNA evidence.



KarishmaB

For Choice E, I had a question on "deduce that." I have seen many verbs on the GMAT be accompanied by "that" after. It has become common convention to prefer "that" after verbs because it adds a level of specificity from my understanding of the usage?

The classic example that Manhattan Prep offers is something along the lines of: "I know Kayne West is a musician" = you personally know Kayne vs. "I know that Kayne West is a musician" = you know of Kayne and that he is a musician.

An example that confuses me: "I believe she will win" vs "I believe that she will win" --> why is the "that" needed?

So, essentially, when is the "that" not necessary?

• Similarly on this question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/by-using-a-p ... 45196.html I am not sure why "that" is omitted after "sounds". I realize that this is in the non-underlined portion of the question, but I would have expected to see a "that" after sounds to be "By using a process called echolocation to analyze the echoes of the high-pitched sounds THAT they produce."

• And on this question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/seismologist ... 93426.html why would you need to say "signals THAT WERE detected"?

Thank you again for being a rockstar :)
Show more

The verb 'deduced' will take an object after it. Deduced what?

He deduced the answer.
'the answer' is what he deduced.

When we need to give a clause, we use the 'that clause.' Here, 'that clause' acts as a noun. The use of 'that' shows that the clause that follows is what was deduced.
Scientists deduced that an epidemic struck in the empire's waning days.

Scientists deduced an epidemic struck in the empire's waning days.
If we remove the 'that,' it becomes a bit hard to understand at least in the first read. Did they deduce 'an epidemic' (the way he deduced 'the answer')? So we use 'that.'

When we use 'that clause' as a relative clause such that 'that' is the object of the relative clause, we can omit it without changing the meaning or causing ambiguity.

'... analyse the sounds they produce' or '... analyse the sounds that they produce' are the same.
In the relative clause, 'they produce the sounds,' the sounds is the object of the verb 'produce.'

When the antecedent of 'that' is the subject of the relative clause, we cannot omit 'that'
For example:
I can hear the sounds that are causing these vibrations.
We cannot omit 'that' here - I can hear the sounds are causing these vibrations.
'are causing' is a verb here.

Though we can use present participle modifier.
I can hear the sounds causing these vibrations.
User avatar
woohoo921
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 516
Own Kudos:
142
Given Kudos: 623
Posts: 516
Kudos: 142
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 29 Nov 2022, 06:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

hello! I am so sorry to come back to this and bother you again. For the question I linked to "(A) the upward thrust that threw one man straight into the air, and the strange electromagnetic signals detected hours before the temblor" wouldn't this be correct without "that"?

Also for: "I believe she will win" vs "I believe that she will win" --> is the "that" needed because if you remove it, the meaning is changed to "you believe in the individual herself... rather than you believe that this individual will win?

Unfortunately, I am still struggling on this topic. Thank you again for all of your help.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
 [1]
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 29 Nov 2022, 23:06
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
woohoo921
KarishmaB

hello! I am so sorry to come back to this and bother you again. For the question I linked to "(A) the upward thrust that threw one man straight into the air, and the strange electromagnetic signals detected hours before the temblor" wouldn't this be correct without "that"?

Also for:
"I believe she will win" vs "I believe that she will win" --> is the "that" needed because if you remove it, the meaning is changed to "you believe in the individual herself... rather than you believe that this individual will win?

Unfortunately, I am still struggling on this topic. Thank you again for all of your help.
Show more


'that clauses' have different uses. A 'that clause' can be a noun clause (acts as a noun). It is a good idea to use 'that' for clarity.
I believe that she will win.
Tells us what it is that I believe.

I believe she will win.
is used commonly in spoken English and may be quite acceptable for short clauses which are easy to understand but it is better to use 'that' for complete clarity.

'that clause' can be a relative clause (adjective) in which case it modifies a noun.

"(A) the upward thrust that threw one man straight into the air, and the strange electromagnetic signals detected hours before the temblor"

'that threw one man straight into the air,' modifies 'the upward thrust.'
In the that clause, 'that' stands for 'the upward thrust' and is the subject. The upward thrust threw one man into the air.
We cannot remove 'that' here.

Consider: the upward thrust that the rocket experienced ....
Here, 'that' is the object of the 'that clause'.
The rocket experienced the upward thrust. Here we can remove 'that'
'the upward thrust the rocket experienced ...' is fine.
User avatar
Sneha2021
User avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2020
Last visit: 10 Jun 2025
Posts: 314
Own Kudos:
38
Given Kudos: 522
Location: India
Posts: 314
Kudos: 38
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 19 Dec 2022, 08:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

Hi Karishma,

(C) Scientists recovered DNA evidence from studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, being able to deduce from this
Can you please explain the role of "being"?

Also I'm confuse with the sentence structure. (Main clause, dependent clause?)
"being able to deduce from this" - Is it a modifier?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 19 Dec 2022, 22:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sneha2021
KarishmaB

Hi Karishma,

(C) Scientists recovered DNA evidence from studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, being able to deduce from this
Can you please explain the role of "being"?

Also I'm confuse with the sentence structure. (Main clause, dependent clause?)
"being able to deduce from this" - Is it a modifier?
Show more

There is no point evaluating the structure of every incorrect option because often the structure would be incorrect.
In (C), they probably wanted to give a comma + verb-ing structure to show cause - effect (assuming that some students may think it makes sense) but this case is not an example of cause-effect. The effect is often automatically derived from the previous action when used correctly.
Hence, 'comma + being able to deduce' is not the correct structure.
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,765
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,765
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 13 Jan 2023, 01:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
AbdurRakib
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this that an epidemic of malaria struck in the empire’s waning days.


(A) Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this

(B) In studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by scientists, who were able to deduce from this

(C) Scientists recovered DNA evidence from studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, being able to deduce from this

(D) Skeletons unearthed near Rome allowed scientists to recover DNA evidence, and they were able to deduce from it

(E) Scientists studying skeletons unearthed near Rome recovered DNA evidence from which they were able to deduce

Show more

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that scientists who were studying skeletons unearthed near Rome recovered DNA evidence, and from this evidence, they were able to deduce that an epidemic of malaria struck in the empire’s waning days.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Pronouns + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• In a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.

A:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses "Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome" to modify "DNA evidence", illogically implying that the DNA evidence was studying the skeletons; the intended meaning is that the scientists were studying the skeletons; remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun.
2/ Option A suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as it is unclear whether "this" refers to "DNA evidence" or to the act of unearthing the DNA evidence, as a placeholder pronoun.

B:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses "In studying skeletons unearthed near Rome" to modify "DNA evidence", illogically implying that the DNA evidence was studying the skeletons; the intended meaning is that the scientists were studying the skeletons; remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun.
2/ Option B suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as it is unclear whether "this" refers to "DNA evidence" or to the act of unearthing the DNA evidence, as a placeholder pronoun.

C:
1/ This answer choice suffers from pronoun ambiguity, as it is unclear whether "this" refers to "DNA evidence" or to the act of unearthing the DNA evidence, as a placeholder pronoun.
2/ Option C uses the passive phrase "being able to deduce", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D:
1/ This answer choice slightly alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "Skeletons...allowed scientists to recover DNA evidence"; the construction of this clause implies that because of the skeletons scientists were able to recover DNA evidence; the intended meaning is that scientists who were studying the skeletons discovered DNA evidence.
2/ Option D uses the needlessly indirect construction "and they were able to deduce from it", rendering it awkward and needlessly indirect.

E: Correct.
1/ This answer choice avoids the meaning errors seen in Options A,B, and D, as it uses the clause "Scientists studying skeletons unearthed near Rome recovered DNA evidence"; the modification of "Scientists" with the phrase "studying skeletons" and the construction of this clause conveys the intended meaning - that scientists who were studying the skeletons discovered DNA evidence.
2/ Option E avoids the pronoun error seen in Options A, B, and C, as it modifies the noun "DNA evidence" with the phrase "from which they were able to deduce", clearly referring to "DNA evidence" with the pronoun "which".
3/ Option E is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Phrase Comma Subject" and "Subject Comma Phrase" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
kelly_jacques
User avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2023
Last visit: 10 Jul 2023
Posts: 37
Given Kudos: 107
Location: Canada
Posts: 37
Kudos: 0
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 23 Jun 2023, 08:12
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja There are conflicting notes above on the role of "they" in Option D. I understand that it is wrong, but from a learning perspective, I am trying to understand if "they" is incorrect because of ambiguity or because it clearly refers to skeletons. I understand there are other elements that are wrong with the sentence as well, but I am trying to understand "they". Could you clarify if this is correct:

"if a pronoun is the subject of a clause and has two possible antecedents of which one is the subject of another clause in the sentence, then the pronoun would unambiguously, by virtue of parallelism, refer to the subject antecedent. Hence in option D, "they" clearly refers to "skeletons", and hence the sentence is wrong."
User avatar
Danish234
User avatar
Joined: 08 Feb 2022
Last visit: 14 Oct 2025
Posts: 19
Given Kudos: 100
Posts: 19
Kudos: 0
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 30 Oct 2023, 22:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AjiteshArun
adkikani
Hi Experts GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo

Can you please explain what is so awkward about (D)

(A) and (B) are clearly out since opening verb-ing modifier should modify scientists and not evidence.

(C) being is not used in passive continuous tense also I feel evidence from is incorrect. It should be evidence by studying ..

(D)they correctly refers to scientists and not skeletons , is the phrase - from it- wordier?

(E) I did not select this since was confused if recovered is verb or modifier? note that there is no helping verb here. Does 'they' can only refer to subject in first independent clause ie scientists?
Option D gives a lot of importance to the noun skeletons, going so far as to make it the subject of the sentence. This means that the they is not very clear. It could refer to skeletons or scientists. For example:

A allowed B to enter the room, and he took the test. Super ambiguous, as the he could refer to either A or B.

Also, the structure of the sentence (with D) is not very good. There is a big difference between setting the sentence up as [the two things that scientists did] and setting the sentence up as [skeletons did one thing, and scientists did the other].

In option E, recovered is a verb (subject: scientists). We don't use a helping verb as we're in the active voice.

Scientists recovered DNA evidence. (active)
DNA evidence was recovered by scientists. (passive)
Show more

i just wanted to ask in option E When reading the part "unearthed near Rome recovered". Doesn't it sound like that Rome recovered DNA evidence??
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
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: 5,080
Studying skeletons unearthed near Rome, DNA evidence was recovered by 31 Oct 2023, 20:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Danish234
i just wanted to ask in option E When reading the part "unearthed near Rome recovered". Doesn't it sound like that Rome recovered DNA evidence??
Show more
Hi Danish234,

No. The word near is a preposition, and we expect to see nouns (or gerunds) after prepositions. We don't expect clauses, which means that a reader is very unlikely to connect recovered to Rome. For example:

1. A cricket match played in New Delhi was watched by millions of people. ← We can safely assume that most people would not think that New Delhi was the thing that was watched.

This is not to say that option E is perfect (it can be read in ways that the author did not intend), but as long as it's better than the other 4 options, we should feel comfortable marking it and moving on.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts