It is currently 19 Mar 2018, 14:50

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105

Author Message
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1830
Schools: CBS, Kellogg

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2008, 00:56
Friends,

105A. Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in 'almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology

And OG says, the non-restrictive clause "which...destroying it" is correctly placed next to "emission".

Do you think that "this sentence implies that "which" modifies correctly "emission"?If so, please see more on other OG

105.C
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

Og says, relative clause introduced by "which" incorrectly and illogically modifies "emission"

Thanks
_________________
SVP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1507
Re: Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2008, 10:51
In 105C, "called proton-induced X-ray emission" has no clear referent. This, in turn is followed by a non-restrictive clause. To me, "ambiguous referent" itself makes this answer choice wrong.
SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2457
Re: Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2008, 12:26
sondenso wrote:
Friends,

105A. Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in 'almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology

And OG says, the non-restrictive clause "which...destroying it" is correctly placed next to "emission".

Do you think that "this sentence implies that "which" modifies correctly "emission"?If so, please see more on other OG

105.C
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

Og says, relative clause introduced by "which" incorrectly and illogically modifies "emission"

Thanks

I see the following flaws:

1. What exactly is "proton-induced X-ray emission"? Is it a technique or air pollutants? So ambiguity is there.

2. Also two phrases ("called proton-induced X-ray emission" and "which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it") at a time are not correct:
_________________

Gmat: http://gmatclub.com/forum/everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html

GT

Manager
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 189
Re: Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2008, 13:04
sondenso wrote:
Friends,

105A. Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in 'almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology

And OG says, the non-restrictive clause "which...destroying it" is correctly placed next to "emission".

Do you think that "this sentence implies that "which" modifies correctly "emission"?If so, please see more on other OG

105.C
A technique originally developed for detecting air pollutants, called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can quickly analyze the chemical elements in almost any substance without destroying it, is finding uses in medicine, archaeology, and criminology.

Og says, relative clause introduced by "which" incorrectly and illogically modifies "emission"

Thanks

I think OG s wording is getting you confused.
which is placed close to emission in A and the clause beginning with which is modifying a technique.
In C which is placed near emission but a technique is no where near emission. In A which is modifying a technique. C has so many other errors as already explained by other members in the thread.
HTH
Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 92
Re: Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2008, 15:51
"Originally developed for detecting air pollutants, a technique called proton-induced X-ray emission, which can"
"Which" modifies "a technique" and not "emission"
_________________

Kick GMAT ass

Re: Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105   [#permalink] 11 Nov 2008, 15:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Stup question on Modifiers-OG11-105

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.