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 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 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.
01 Jan 2013, 18:20
Kudos
Bookmarks
The Smiths avoid the Browns because they dislike their children.
Question asks to identify pronoun and their antecedents and correct the sentence if their is any ambiguity.
Solution says:The original sentence is ambiguous. The antecedent of they could be the Smiths or the Browns.Likewise, the antecedent of their could be the Smiths or the Browns.
My question is - on the basis of this rule that 'A pronoun in subject position in one clause may often be presumed to refer to the subject of a parallel clause' wouldn't they clearly refers to Smiths ?
Question asks to identify pronoun and their antecedents and correct the sentence if their is any ambiguity.
Solution says:The original sentence is ambiguous. The antecedent of they could be the Smiths or the Browns.Likewise, the antecedent of their could be the Smiths or the Browns.
My question is - on the basis of this rule that 'A pronoun in subject position in one clause may often be presumed to refer to the subject of a parallel clause' wouldn't they clearly refers to Smiths ?
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
PrashantPonde
Joined: 27 Jun 2012
Last visit: 29 Jan 2025
Posts: 321
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 185
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: Haas EWMBA '17
01 Jan 2013, 20:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
In my opinion, though Smiths are the subject of the first part of the sentence, both 'they' and 'their' have more than one possible antecedents. Even from meaning perspective, both Smiths and Browns can possibly take the place for 'they' and 'their'. This sentence needs to be reworded. Its unlikely that GMAT will leave such ambiguity in the correct answer choice.
02 Jan 2013, 13:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
It's a leap from "may often be presumed" to "clearly." Think about the following examples:
My parents don't like dogs because they bark.
Here, "they" clearly does not refer to the subject of the first clause--it's the dogs that bark.
My parents support charities because they are good people.
Here, "they" clearly refers to the original subject--the charities are not "good people."
My parents had lunch with my grandparents before they left town.
Here, it's really hard to tell the author's intent. From the sentences above, we see that such a pronoun could go either way. A good writer avoids this kind of ambiguity, so the GMAT won't have it in a correct sentence. The other two sentences could easily be correct answer choices, because there's no real ambiguity.
My parents don't like dogs because they bark.
Here, "they" clearly does not refer to the subject of the first clause--it's the dogs that bark.
My parents support charities because they are good people.
Here, "they" clearly refers to the original subject--the charities are not "good people."
My parents had lunch with my grandparents before they left town.
Here, it's really hard to tell the author's intent. From the sentences above, we see that such a pronoun could go either way. A good writer avoids this kind of ambiguity, so the GMAT won't have it in a correct sentence. The other two sentences could easily be correct answer choices, because there's no real ambiguity.
