The world wildlife fund has declared that global warming, a phenomenon

Sentence Analysis

The sentence says that the WWF has declared something about global warming. The sentence then presents a long modifier for ‘global warming’ – all of which is underlined. Before we look at the modifier and the underlined part, let’s look at what the sentence essentially says. It says that WWF has declared that global warming will create big problems among migratory birds by altering the environment in harmful ways.

Let’s now look at the underlined part:

global warming, a phenomenon most scientists agree to be caused by human beings in burning fossil fuels,
The underlined part is interesting since we have ‘a phenomenon’ followed by a clause ‘most scientists agree’, and then the modifier of the phenomenon continues. We need to understand this structure first. Let’s look at the below sentence:

• The company has hired Tom, who was the main reason behind the spectacular rise of his previous company.

In the above sentence, we are saying that Tom WAS the main reason behind the rise of his previous company. We are sure that he was the reason. Right?

Now, what if we are not sure? What if we just want to communicate that this is what many people believe so? How would we write such a sentence?

In the following way:

The company has hired Tom, who many people believe was the main reason behind the spectacular rise of his previous company.

Please notice that everything else is same in the sentence. We have just added ‘many people believe’ between the subject ‘who’ and the verb ‘was’. By doing so, we are communicating that this is what many people believe so. It may not be true; it may not even be the same as what we believe.

Also, when you are trying to understand the meaning of the sentence, you can just remove “many people believe” from the sentence and then read it. Once you have understood the remaining part, you can then insert this part back to get the overall meaning of the sentence.

Similarly, we can remove “most scientists agree” from the given sentence to better understand the meaning of the remaining sentence and then we can add the meaning of this part to the remaining sentence. Now, coming back to the sentence:

global warming, a phenomenon most scientists agree to be caused by human beings in burning fossil fuels,
There are two problems with this sentence:

(i) The global warming is not caused “IN” burning fossil fuels. It is caused ‘BY’ burning fossil fuels.

(ii) “to be caused” is better replaced by “is caused”. If you are wondering why, then I don’t have much of an answer here. I ‘feel’ “to be” is slightly awkward here. And OG explanation supports my ‘feeling’, so there you have it!

Option Analysis
(A) Incorrect. For the reasons mentioned above.

(B) Incorrect. For the following reasons:

(i) When we have such structures as “most scientists agree” inserted inside a clause, then they should come between the subject and the verb. Here, both the subject (“that”) and the verb (“is”) appear after this structure. This order is incorrect.

(ii) Logically, the global warming is caused by the burning of the fossils fuels, not by the fossil fuels themselves. Don’t blame them!

(C) Correct. Everything is fine here. “that” also appears here and adds clarity to the sentence. Also, this option logically says that the global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. “human beings’” is acting as an adjective to ‘burning’, rightly meaning that the burning is by human beings.

(D) Incorrect. For the following reasons:

(1) If we remove “most scientists agree” from the sentence, it becomes “which on as phenomenon”. Non-sense! Right?

Now, it doesn’t mean that we can always remove such clauses from the relative clauses. At times, a clause appearing after a relative pronoun may be the main clause and the relative pronoun may just be acting as an object. For example:



2. The option suggests that the global warming is caused by human beings, and it presents additional information about human beings – they burn fossil fuels. We can see that saying so makes the main cause of global warming i.e. “burning of fossil fuels” just additional information in the sentence. Clearly, this option distorts the meaning of the sentence.

(E) Incorrect. For the following reasons:

(1) Use of “to be” is awkward, as explained in the sentence analysis.

(2) Repetition of Error No. 2 of option B.

Hi RonTargetTestPrep AnishPassi AnthonyRitz AjiteshArun avigutman - In my view, there are two ways to read (C). Per my screenshot

(first interpretation) -- is how the intended way [most scientists agree is ANOTHER mini-subordinate modifier [blacked out in the screenshot]

But there is another way to read (C)

(Second interpretation) -- [that most scientists agree] is a relative clause (circled in red) referring to "phenomenon " as seen in my screenshot (#2)

When i read first (C) - i read (C), thinking [that most scientists agree] (seen in red in the screenshot) is itself a mini-relative clause and referring to "phenomenon". If you interpret (C) this way, obviously then (c) does not make sense because this interpretation of (C) -- implies -- there are scientists who dont believe in the phenomenon, global warming.

Question : How were you so sure NOT to interpret (C) in this manner ?

yes, this is correct.

This is where I lose you, jabhatta2. Please elaborate on how you get “believe in the phenomenon, global warming.” from your interpretation.

Posted from my mobile device

Hi avigutman - I dont think i asked my question properly. let me explain why i eliminated (C) at first round




I read (C) as #2 and thus makred (C) wrong.

Because if you have a "relative clauses" - then there are "2 versions" of the noun



Another example



Simirlarly - when you have phenomenon [that most scientists agree] is caused by XYZ - you could think of this as "2 versions" of the phenomenon

version # 1) phenomenon [that most scientists agree]
version # 2) phenomenon that some scientists DONT agree

Given i didnt think there were "2 versions" of the phenomenon-

I marked (C) wrong for incorrect meaning.

Jabhatta,

I see. You're reading this as "[a phenomenon that most scientists agree] is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels" rather than as "a phenomenon [that most scientists agree is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels]."

But one cannot "agree" a phenomenon. Properly stated, one might "agree to" a phenomenon or, far more likely, "agree about" a phenomenon.

This is why the reading in which "agree" describes phenomenon in that way isn't a concern. There's no real ambiguity here. We must mean, basically, "scientists agree [that] the phenomenon is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels" -- and not the nonsensical "scientists agree the phenomenon [that] is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels."

As a bonus, your reading leaves us with an extra verb, since "is caused" isn't in the relative clause in your reading. As a result the verb "will create" ends up dangling, creating a sentence construction error. There's just no way that C can be intended like that. So, again, there's no ambiguity, and no problem with C.

I hope this helps!

Well, jabhatta2, if you read (C) as #2 then you were right to mark it wrong.
The question you should ask yourself is how, in the future, will you see the possibility of #1, and thus mark it correct. When you read the original sentence and tried to figure out the intended meaning, what did you think scientists are supposed to agree on, exactly, according to the author? In other words, I don’t think your mistake was in interpreting answer choice (C); I think your mistake was in interpreting the author’s intended meaning (which should have been done prior to reading the answer choices).
I'll just point out a couple of observations here:
1. In the examples you provided of a relative clause, that relative clause is required in order to identify a specific member of a group (which dog or purse we're talking about, specifically). However, we already know exactly which phenomenon we're talking about: global warming.
2. "that most scientists agree" is not a way to identify or describe a phenomenon. In the very least, we're missing a preposition at the end (e.g. "a phenomenon that most scientists agree on").

Hi jabhatta2,

I’ll add something a bit more general here.

Let me take an example:

Is the following sentence correct?

Sentence: The army of local warriors created to protect the king is 200 years old.

Q. What is the phrase “created to protect the king” modifying here?

My thought process to figure that out:

Interpretation 1: It is modifying “local warriors”. But then it doesn’t make much sense for the warriors to have been created to protect the king.

Interpretation 2: It is modifying “the army”. This makes sense. There was an army that was created to protect the king.

Therefore, the phrase is modifying the army.


Did you go through a similar process?


Now, what if I stopped after the first interpretation?
1. The phrase is modifying warriors
2. That doesn't make logical sense
3. Therefore the sentence is wrong

Do you see a problem with this process?

Coming up with interpretations is not a problem.
But, if we
1. come up with an interpretation
2. decide that that's the only possible interpretation
3. and then if the interpretation leads to a grammatical or logical problem, eliminate the option (without checking for alternate interpretations)

That's a problem.

In the given sentence,
You came up with a particular interpretation —> That’s absolutely fine.
You decided that the interpretation leads to an incorrect sentence —> Perfect.
You rejected the answer choice —> Did you try to figure out whether there can be another interpretation? If not, this is where you faltered.

Hi experts,
In C, ''most scientists agree on a phenomenon (global warming) THAT is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels'' which seems absurd to me! Can you clarify the sentence a bit, please?

Hi Experts,
In A, ''human beings in burning fossil fuels'' and in A and B ''a phenomenon most scientists agree'' is just looks awkward to me. These words don't make any sense themselves. Can I cross out choice A and B by this way?

GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyTargetTestPrep EMPOWERgmatVerbal

(B) a phenomenon most scientists agree that is caused by fossil fuels burned by human beings,

(C) a phenomenon that most scientists agree is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels,

What is the difference in meaning created by the difference in the placement of "that". Most of the post that I read said it is awkward (would have read OG solution instead) but why? Can you please explain.

It's easier to say precisely why (C) is right, in my opinion. "That" after the phenomenon makes it clear we are describing "a phenomenon." What are we saying? That most scientists agree this phenomenon is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels.

In (B) the placement of 'that' is strange.

If (B) were its own sentence, we would say "Most scientists agree THAT the phenomenon is caused by fossil fuels burned by human beings." Here, "that" is a conjunction.

But (B) is not its own sentence, (B) is a modifying phrase (as is (C) for that matter).

First:

Think of the (correct) structure:

"a ball of yarn that the cat played with"

We have two modifiers for the ball:

It is 'of yarn' (what it's made of)

And

It was played with by the cat.

In (B), the similar placement of 'that' seems to be describing the noun "a phenomenon most scientists agree" ... here, the 'agree' is not structurally tied to the cause of the phenomenon. The phenomenon has two modifiers:

its a phenomenon most scientists agree (...a thought that doesn't make sense. Agree how? Agree about what?)

And

It's a phenomenon that is caused by fossil fuels burned by human beings (this part seems fine).


(B) is conflating two structures: where you would put 'that' if you were saying the clause "Most scientists agree that..." and where you would put 'that' if you were describing "a phenomenon."

If we compare options vertically

In options A, B and C

"a phenomenon" is a noun modifier or a superior modifier.

Superior modifier is highly preferred.

Eliminate D and E

In option A, "agree to be" is wrong. Right usage will be " agree to...."

Also, " caused by human beings in burning fossil fuels," means Global warming is cause by humans.

Humans don't cause global warming

Eliminate A

In B, we have "agree that is caused by "

here "that" is modifying "agree"

"that" can modify nouns, not verbs

Eliminate B

Hence C is the answer

Hello Experts ,
AjiteshArun EducationAisle

I want to understand the difference between to be+ verb and to + verb. Is there any difference ? or do they have the same meaning of INTEND ie with an intention pr purposefully

Let's take only a part of the above underlined portion

a phenomenon most scientists agree to be caused by human beings.

Does this mean that human beings have caused a phenomena (global warming) purposefully which is agreed by most scientists.

Thanks

I would just choose to not select "agree to be" purely for idiomatic reasons, rather than "intention".

While it is true that intention is often best demonstrated by "to + verb" construct, the other way round is not necessarily true; in other words, every "to + verb" does not show intention.

An example that comes to mind:

Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.

This is a correct sentence; it clearly does not depict that embryologists have found evidence with the intention to suggest <something>.

Request Expert Reply:
What kind of role theagree play in choice C? Is it verb?

The World Wildlife Fund has declared that global warming, a phenomenon that most scientists agree is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels, will create havoc among migratory birds by altering the environment in ways harmful to their habitats.
What's the core of this sentence? Is it like as follows?
What's the core of the sentence? Is it as follows?
The World Wildlife Fund has declared that global warming, a phenomenon that most scientists agree is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels, will create havoc among migratory birds by altering the environment in ways harmful to their habitats.
global warming is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels, will create havoc among migratory birds by altering the environment in ways harmful to their habitats.
Is it? But, It does not seems to be ok!

Here's what remains if you remove "most scientists agree" from choice (C):

"The World Wildlife Fund has declared that global warming, a phenomenon that is caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels, will create havoc among migratory birds by altering the environment in ways harmful to their habitats."

The noun modifier in bold describes the "phenomenon", and "phenomenon" (plus its modifiers) then modifies "global warming" (i.e. "global warming [is] a phenomenon that is caused by...").

Stripping out those modifiers, we're left with this:

"The World Wildlife Fund has declared that global warming will create havoc among migratory birds..."

In this case, the "that" clause functions as a noun, telling us what the WWF has declared.

The "most scientists agree" part is a clause (subject = scientists; verb = agree) that's actually functioning as an adverb here, since it qualifies or limits the "is caused" part. So yes, "agree" is in fact a verb, and it's part of a clause that acts as a modifier.

I hope that helps!

So, what if the is is removed from choice C? It seems that would still make sense! Isn't it?
^^ Can't we write like the below?
a phenomenon caused by human beings' burning of fossil fuels? Do we need to put IS before ''caused''?
Thank you...