That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer

Sentence Construction
Subject Verb

That //that used as pronoun and refers to the line "educators...."

educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology

can hardly be said
that it is their fault : //that used as a connector. "it" refers to the line "educators...."
Alvin Toffler,

one of the most prominent students of the future,

did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock,

published in 1970

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault
- do not find any big issues other than sounding awkward and using too many pronouns
(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault
- simplified sentence "That... can hardly be said to be at fault", "at" should be "their" in this context for the correct meaning
(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology
– changes meaning, puts onus on educators to anticipate the impact which is incorrect
(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology
- Concise. Only one pronoun "it" used
(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said.
– changes meaning from “hardly (not) being at fault” to “responsible for being at fault”

Thanks.

Its a silly question but can someone tell me what does "it" refer to in option d?

Hello santro789,

I will be glad to help you out with this one.

The pronoun it does not refer to any noun in Choice D because it is not meant to do so. In Choice D, pronoun it has been used as a placeholder.

So yes, apart from referring to a logical noun entity, certain pronouns are also used as placeholders.

As suggested by the name itself, the placeholder pronouns just hole the subject or the object place in a sentence without referring to any noun.

For example:

1. It rained all night.

2. The teacher made it very clear that the project must be submitted with 48 hours.

In the above-mentioned sentences, pronoun it does not refer to any noun. Similar is the usage of it in the relevant official question.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault --
Marty Murray's explanation -->

That Jim did not know how to skate became quickly apparent.

That Jim did not know how to skate is a noun clause and is subject of the sentence.

So in the original version, That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology is the subject, and can hardly be said is the verb.

So the original would be a well constructed sentence except for the fact that after the verb there is an issue. said that it is their fault does not make sense. The point is not that there is someone who said that it is their fault. The point is that that educators have not anticipated the impact can hardly be SAID TO BE their fault.

(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault --meaning changed -- we don't know who is at fault

(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology -- does the usage of educators who changes the meaning here by reducing educators to a subset

(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology

(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said -If we replaced the full noun again with "this fact," the sentence would read: "This fact can hardly be said." This meaning is unclear. The focus is not that this fact literally can't be said; the focus is that there are no grounds for saying the educators are at fault.



AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , egmat , sayantanc2k , DmitryFarber , MagooshExpert , mikemcgarry , daagh -- please enlighten

1. In option C , does the usage of educators who changes the meaning here by reducing educators to a subset ?
2. Placeholders pronouns -
In option C , each instance of IT acts as a placeholder ?
It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology

Can you please provide some guidelines for placeholder pronoun ? I think only the word IT can act as a placeholder ?
Placeholders always start a clause ?

1. Yes, C has a different meaning, and it is unlikely that it is the intended meaning.

2. The first it points to that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology (the whole that clause). The second it is a normal pronoun. The problem with the second it is that there is nothing in the sentence for it to refer to (what is the fault the sentence is talking about?).

3. Some examples of dummy pronouns:
(a) It was you who raised the alarm. (the it lets us postpone the you)
(b) It is easy to trigger the alarm accidentally. (it refers to an infinitive)
(c) It is clear that it is too easy to trigger the alarm. (it refers to a that clause)
(d) There is a way to avoid triggering the alarm. (there lets us postpone a way)
(e) It is cold outside. (this it doesn't really refer to anything within the sentence and is used just to help form the sentence)
(f) How cold does it get during winters? (in this case the it may or may not be referring to an actual place or thing)

4. For all practical purposes, yes. If the sentence is phrased as a question, then no.
(a) Was it you who triggered the alarm?

Had

Option (A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault

been

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault,

was it correct?

No. We cannot say X can hardly be said their fault. This is because can be said is passive, and the thing that is being said (or not said) has already been mentioned (X).

We cannot say X. (active)
X cannot be said. (passive)

X cannot be said Y. (wrong)

Hm.... as a non-native speaker, I really want to ask what does "can hardly be said " mean??
Cheers!

That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.

Hi experts,

In my opinion the given question is wrong because the first sentence is followed by ':' instead of ';'.

Please tell me, whether I am correct, If not, please tell me why.

It's okay to put a colon between two clauses when the second explains the first (a colon can be used in other ways as well). In this case the second clause is explaining the first. It tells us why we cannot blame educators for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology.

Dear DmitryFarber GMATGuruNY AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep

That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault

Why is A. wrong?
Why can't "it" refers to a noun clause at the beginning of the sentence (i.e. "THAT educators have...")

Are there any other grounds to reject A. besides idiomatic usage?

Mary said that her experiment had succeeded.
Here, the that-clause in green serves as the direct object of said.
WHAT did Mary say?
She said THAT HER EXPERIMENT HAD SUCCEEDED.

Passive forms of to say:
is said, are said, was said, were said, be said...

Rule:
A PASSIVE VERB cannot take a direct object.

A: That educators have not anticipated the impact can hardly be said that it is their fault
Here, the that-clause in red cannot serve as the direct object of be said (passive verb).
Eliminate A.

That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.


(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault

(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault

(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology

(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology

(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said


it is adjective that-clause
it is adjective to do

is called extraposition clause. this clause is prefered to normal clause if both clauses show the comment of the speaker, presenting the same meaning.

it is good that you pass gmat test
that you pass gmat test is good.

but both normal clause and extraposition clause do not always offer the same meaning. in case of choice D and E, each offers different meaning

meaning of choice D is a comment of speaker. meaning of choice E is a phenomenon not a comment

so, choice E suffer to error. preference error and meaning change error.

takeaway is that
extraposition is prefered
inversion could change meaning



another sentence in which extraposition clause is prefered is

//To Josephine Baker, Paris was her home long before it was fashionable to be an expatriate, //and she remained in France during the Second World War as a performer and an intelligence agent for the Resistance

(A) To Josephine Baker, Paris was her home long before it was fashionable to be an expatriate

(B) For Josephine Baker, long before it was fashionable to be an expatriate, Paris was her home

(C) Josephine Baker made Paris her home long before to be an expatriate was fashionable

(D) Long before it was fashionable to be an expatriate, Josephine Baker made Paris her home

(E) Long before it was fashionable being an expatriate, Paris was home to Josephine Baker

That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault: Alvin Toffler, one of the most prominent students of the future, did not even mention microcomputers in Future Shock, published in 1970.


(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault-> It is a pronoun, refers back to impact or MT.

(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault -> MT to be at fault or Impact to be at fault.

(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology-> it is fault of educators can be better said as educators are at fault and who have not anticipated can be better said as not anticipating.

(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology-> Seems better. Impact of MT is also making sense. Let's keep it.

(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said-> MT can hardly be said, but, we need to talk about impact.

So, I think D.

Hi GMATNinja
Could you share your process of elimination, sir?
Thank you..

Hello VeritasKarishma mam GMATNinja sir, kindly explain the process of elimination for this question

When we read the sentence, we understand the intent.

What is the intent pf the sentence?

Educators did not anticipate the impact of microcomputer technology - but it is not their fault.

The sentence needs to convey this meaning - that they did not anticipate the impact of tech was not their fault.
The second part of the sentence shows how a prominent student of future did not even mention microcomputers. So the sentence is trying to say that perhaps anticipating the impact of tech is hard for everyone, even people who study it closely so why fault the educators for not anticipating it.

Let's look for the sentence that conveys this meaning:

(A) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said that it is their fault

Incorrect.
"That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said" - means we can hardly say that educators have not anticipated the impact of tech. This means educators have anticipated the impact of tech. But that is not true.
Next the sentence says "... can hardly be said that it is their fault"
So now it seems the sentence is telling is that what can hardly be said is that it is their fault. Now what is "it" here? and what exactly can "hardly be said"? Makes no sense.

(B) That educators have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said to be at fault

We want to say that EDUCATORS are not at fault. This sentence says
"That educators have not done A" can hardly be said to be at fault. So the sentence is saying that "That educators have not done A" is not at fault. Makes no sense. People can be at fault. How can facts be at fault?

(C) It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators who have not anticipated the impact of microcomputer technology

This tell us that we cannot say that it is the fault of educators. What is "it" here?
"who have not anticipated ..." modifies only the educators. So it tells us what kind of educators we are talking about. If we remove this modifier we get

It can hardly be said that it is the fault of educators ...:Alvin ...

The sentence doesn't explain what is the fault.

(D) It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology

Correct.
It can hardly said that ...
What follows is what cannot be said.
"It can hardly be said that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology"
Correct. This is what cannot be said. Educators are not at fault.


(E) The fact that educators are at fault for not anticipating the impact of microcomputer technology can hardly be said

When we start with "the fact that", we are giving a fact after it. The fact given is "educators are at fault for not anticipating..." But we want to say that they are not at fault. Then how can it be a fact?
"This fact cannot be said" doesn't make sense. A fact is what is true.

Answer (D)