Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
55% (01:19) correct
45%
(01:35)
wrong
based on 788
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The scientists noted that rats suffering from the rare degenerative disease had begun to die six months earlier, even though they had shown no signs of the disease then.
(A) earlier, even though they had shown no signs of the disease then
(B) earlier, but they were not showing no signs of the disease then
(C) earlier, no outward signs of the disease had been shown in them, however
(D) earlier without any signs of the disease shown then
(E) earlier, even though no signs of it were seen in them at that time
Source: Aristotle New SC Question Bank
(A) earlier, even though they had shown no signs of the disease then
(B) earlier, but they were not showing no signs of the disease then
(C) earlier, no outward signs of the disease had been shown in them, however
(D) earlier without any signs of the disease shown then
(E) earlier, even though no signs of it were seen in them at that time
Source: Aristotle New SC Question Bank
11 Mar 2014, 14:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
aagar2003
Second Option : earlier, but they were not showing no signs of the disease then
This option is fatally wrong because of double negation. 'They were not showing ANY signs of disease' is to be used instead of ''They were not showing NO signs of disease'
Now coming back to your point. 'They' refers back to rats because its the rats who are being noted for the disease and not the scientists. Please make sure that you never check pronoun errors in vacuum. Grammatically a pronoun can refer back to multiple nouns but if contextually it refers back to one noun then it can simply be overlooked.
You might want to fit the noun in place of pronoun to check if it makes sense.
The scientists noted that rats suffering from the rare degenerative disease had begun to die six months earlier, even though SCIENTISTS had shown no signs of the disease then.
how can the dying of rats be connected to scientists showing signs of disease? can it?
I'll explain you with another example mentioned in one of the GMATclub threads:
King George is the ruler of the largest empire, its size as large as a continent.
What are the possible antecedents for the pronoun “its” in the above sentence?
“empire, continent”.
Now consider the following sentences and see which of them make sense in the context of the given sentence.
a. King George is the ruler of the largest empire, the empire’s size as large as a continent. (Makes perfect sense.)
b. King George is the ruler of the largest empire, the continent’s size as large as a continent. (This sentence doesn’t sound logical. Why does a continent come into the picture all of a sudden?)
As you can see only “empire” is the logical antecedent of the pronoun “its” in the above sentence.
Therefore the pronoun “its” unambiguously refers to “empire”
Which is why they use the word 'logical' in the very definition.
Attachments
Screen Shot 2014-03-11 at 5.43.00 PM.png [ 38.46 KiB | Viewed 9384 times ]
General Discussion
In the first example below, the ‘they’ is clearly ambiguous because it can refer to either the control group mice or those who receive Xylanol.
In the second sentence, the ‘they’ is apparently ambiguous. However were we to say that the ‘they’ could refer to mice, we are saying that it is possible that mice could dress up in laboratory gear. This is clearly absurd because outside of Disney mice do not wear clothes. Thus a pronoun is not ambiguous if can reasonably only refer to one thing/group.
Clearly Ambiguous
Compared to mice in a control group, those mice receiving Xylanol were more likely to develop tumors, even if they had tumors before the study.
Not Ambiguous but Absurd
Scientists who test potentially carcinogenic substances on mice may be at a slight risk for cancer, even if they wear special protective clothing.
Original Sentence
The scientists noted that rats suffering from the rare degenerative disease had begun to die six months earlier, even though they had shown no signs of the disease then.
As for the original sentence, the potential ambiguity is not absurd the way it is in the second example above. After all, scientists could potentially show signs of a degenerative disease (vs. mice donning lab gear). Nonetheless, it is clear from the sentence that the scientists are studying the rats for a disease. Therefore, when the second half of the sentence mention ‘they’ in reference to the disease, it is clear who the ‘they’ is.
Now let’s contrast the original sentence to the first one above. The ‘they’ could refer to either of the two groups, i.e. either the control group of the Xylanol group could have consisted of mice that had tumors before the study began. However, in the original sentence the scientists were the ones studying a degenerative disease they were not the ones suffering from it.
In the second sentence, the ‘they’ is apparently ambiguous. However were we to say that the ‘they’ could refer to mice, we are saying that it is possible that mice could dress up in laboratory gear. This is clearly absurd because outside of Disney mice do not wear clothes. Thus a pronoun is not ambiguous if can reasonably only refer to one thing/group.
Clearly Ambiguous
Compared to mice in a control group, those mice receiving Xylanol were more likely to develop tumors, even if they had tumors before the study.
Not Ambiguous but Absurd
Scientists who test potentially carcinogenic substances on mice may be at a slight risk for cancer, even if they wear special protective clothing.
Original Sentence
The scientists noted that rats suffering from the rare degenerative disease had begun to die six months earlier, even though they had shown no signs of the disease then.
As for the original sentence, the potential ambiguity is not absurd the way it is in the second example above. After all, scientists could potentially show signs of a degenerative disease (vs. mice donning lab gear). Nonetheless, it is clear from the sentence that the scientists are studying the rats for a disease. Therefore, when the second half of the sentence mention ‘they’ in reference to the disease, it is clear who the ‘they’ is.
Now let’s contrast the original sentence to the first one above. The ‘they’ could refer to either of the two groups, i.e. either the control group of the Xylanol group could have consisted of mice that had tumors before the study began. However, in the original sentence the scientists were the ones studying a degenerative disease they were not the ones suffering from it.
