|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
26 Jun 2019, 19:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
hammypancakey
Typically, when we get a subject pronoun, the referent for the pronoun is the subject of the previous clause. Take a look at (C) with the "which" modifier removed:
"The electronics company has unveiled what it claims is the smallest network digital camcorder in the world, and it weighs less than 11 ounces."
The subject of the previous clause is the electronics company! Perhaps in the future, when algorithms run everything, we'll see the advent of a 10-ounce electronics company, but until then, we're just gonna have to accept that this construction isn't terribly logical.
To be fair, I'm not sure that the pronoun is WRONG, exactly. But at the very least, the pronoun is confusing. Notice that (D) doesn't have that problem at all: because the phrase "weighs less than 11 ounces" is part of the modifier, the meaning is 100% clear -- and much better than the potentially illogical meaning in (C).
I hope that helps!
02 Jul 2019, 15:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
MS1014
It's not often that "rescue" and "pronoun ambiguity" get tossed into the same sentence, but... I guess the heroism of GMAT tutors has been overlooked for far too long?
(bb, can we replace my profile pic with an image of a ninja rescuing a kitten from a tree? No?)Just to clarify, the problem in (A) isn't pronoun ambiguity, so much as pronoun incoherence. It would be one thing to claim that "it" could refer to one more than antecedent. That's not necessarily wrong. It's a very different thing to say that the apparent antecedent is illogical, as it is in (A).
But if you want a different decision point, take a look at the highlighted region of (A):
- "The electronics company has unveiled what it claims to be the world’s smallest network digital camcorder, the length of which is that of a handheld computer..."
The "which" seems to refer to the "camcorder." Fair enough. But it wouldn't make any sense for "that" to refer to the camcorder as well, so now we have to go looking for a different antecedent. Most likely "that" refers to the "length." So now, after doing a fair amount of work, we'd have the following: "the length of [the camcorder] is [the length] of a handheld computer."
This seems problematic. It's fine to say that two lengths are similar, or that one entity is as long as another. But to claim that one length is another length? Seems fishy to me. At best, it's confusing, and it takes effort to pull any sort of reasonable meaning out of it.
Compare this to the same area of the OA:
- "The electronics company has unveiled what it claims is the world’s smallest network digital camcorder, which is as long as a handheld computer and weighs..."
This is crystal clear. "Which" refers to the "camcorder." And we're told that the camcorder is as long as a handheld computer. Perfectly simple and logical. Most importantly, it's far superior to (A).
I hope that helps!
