Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can identif

C, reasoning is as follows, 40% of the times I am wrong, so don't take my explanations too seriously here.

1)robots (plural) that can identify and then respond (that can action 1 and then action 2) ; eliminate A, B, D,E

2)we now get to their/researchers. Since "their" could be referring to both robots and researchers, added reasoning for A,D.

Which leaves C, E, since I mentioned I'd prefer "action 1 and then action 2" I am going for C

Requesting OA to put me out of my anxiety!

A) I was going to say the "they" is wrong but actually "to which" makes it right because it implies the robots respond to the facial expressions. HOWEVER, the "their" erroneously refers to robots instead of researchers. Therefore, A is gone.

B) "then respondING" should be "and then respond". the verb-ing form is simply incorrect in this context.

C) in this case "them" refers to the facial expressions that the robots respond to, this is the correct intent of the author. Furthermore, "the researchers'" corrects the ambiguity we had with A; you cannot use "they" to refer to researchers this far into the sentence because the pronoun might refer to two other objects before it even begins to refer to the subject (researchers). Of course, "is" refers to "goal" and NOT to researchers and thus "is", is in fact correct. CORRECT ANSWER

D) "as well as" is weird and wordy. And again, verb-ing form does not work here, giving should be give. And AGAIN, the pronoun "their" erroneously refers to something other than researchers

E) Again, verb-ing is wrong, also "is creating" is wrong it should be the infinitive "[is] to create".

This is a classical "find the grammatical errors" because for me, ALL the wrong answers have clear grammatical issues and thus we do not need to be too careful about intended meaning.

Hi e-gmat,

the pronouns as usual are very confusing. I don't know how to draw a border line between unambiguous and ambiguous.

In the the article "Debunking myths" we are told that "A Pronoun should have ONE LOGICAL ANTECEDENT".

Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can identify human facial expressions, to which they will then respond; their goal is primarily creating a robot that will empathize with us.

In the video explanation also, it is explained that "they" has a logical antecedent "robots" and "their" has logical antecedent "researchers".

So, when we are told that there is only ONE LOGICAL ANTECEDENT for both the pronouns then from where does ambiguity comes into picture.

Plz suggest.

[quote="sondenso"]Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can identify human facial expressions, to which they will then respond; their goal is primarily creating a robot that will empathize with us.

(A) expressions, to which they will then respond; their goal is primarily creating
(B) expressions, then responding to them; primarily to create
(C) expressions and then respond to them; the researchers' primary goal is to create
(D) expressions as well as giving a response to them; their primary goal is creation of
(E) expressions and responding to them; primarily, the researchers' goal is cr


could any one help me here?
Japanese researchers are producing sth and their goal is to create?
is it ok or what?

I go with c here because other choices make no sense to me but what about the question I just asked?

The verb "are producing" and the infintive "to create" are not parts of the same parallel structure. In fact they are in two different sentences altogether (joined by a semicolon). It is not an issue that one is a verb and the other is an infinitive since they have no grammatical bearing with each other.

In order to identify parallel elements, it is a good practice to first identify the parallelism marker (such as AND, BETTER THAN, NOT ONLY, BUT ALSO etc.). Once the marker is identified, only then one should try to find the parallel elements.

Hi kamranko, it might be worthwhile to note that different parts of the sentence can be in different tense; it all depends on the context.

Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can identify human facial expressions, to which they will then respond; their goal is primarily creating a robot that will empathize with us.

Issues: Parallelism | Modifier | Pronoun

Analysis:

1. The sentence connects two independent clauses
2. The original sentence has issue with pronoun ambiguity with "they" and "their" and the form of the verb "create"


I have highlighted the issues below:

(A) expressions, to which they will then respond; their goal is primarily creating
- "they" and "their" have pronoun ambiguity error
- "the goal is creating..." is illogical

(B) expressions, then responding to them; primarily to create
- "then responding to them" is a sentence fragment as it is not connected to previous clause; also "them" is ambiguous
- "primarily to create" is missing a subject and is a dependent clause. However, clause following ";" should be independent.

(C) expressions and then respond to them; the researchers' primary goal is to create

(D) expressions as well as giving a response to them; their primary goal is creation of
- "them" and "their" have pronoun ambiguity error
- "creation" also does not seem right (can someone clarify if this is an error or not; and if it is what error does it have)

(E) expressions and responding to them; primarily, the researchers' goal is creating
- "them" have pronoun ambiguity error
- "the goal is creating..." is illogical


Answer: (C)

(C) expressions and then respond to them; the researchers' primary goal is to create

Here how are we sure that "them" refers to human facial expressions and not researchers?

Hi gaitbhu, yes, you could view this as pronoun ambiguity, but a couple of things:

i) Pronoun ambiguity is acceptable on GMAT. So, don't use this as a criterion to eliminate answer choices.

ii) Structurally, them is referring to human facial expressions (The sentence is: robots can identify human facial expressions and then respond to them. So, human facial expressions and them both are objects of their respective clauses).

For test takers, it's important to understand the difference between an orphan pronoun (pronoun with no antecedents) and ambiguous pronoun (pronoun with multiple antecedents):

Orphan pronoun is always incorrect, while ambiguous pronoun is acceptable.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses Ambiguous Pronouns, their application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.

HELLO SIR
if in option C,AND is replaced by AS WELL AS,will the option be correct?

Hello JAIN09,

I am not sure if your doubt still persists. Here is the explanation nonetheless.

IMHO, and can be replaced with as well as in Choice C. However, in doing so, the word then will have to be removed.


Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha

Meaning: Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can do 2 things:
1. identify human facial expression
2. once identified the expression, then respond to them.
One independent clause ends here with semicolon.
2nd clause: The primary goal of researchers is to create a robot with human emotions, a robot that may empathise with us based on the emotions.

Error Analysis:
1. they and their should jump out of the screen at you as soon as you see them.
In a sentence ideally "Every it and its must refer to the same singular antecedent. Every they, them and their must refer to the same plural antecedent"
Here THEY refers to the "Robots" and THEIR refers to the "Researchers". Which does create pronoun ambiguity. Hence needs to be rectified.
2. Meaning error in the sentence. The sentence after the semicolon in the original sentence has a distorted meaning all together. It needs to be immediately thrown out of the window.
"their goal is primarily creating a robot" How can goal create a robot??????
Goes out because of the reasons mentioned above.
Primarily to create?????? Who creates?? The sentence after the semicolon isn't a clause. Hence this structure doesn't make sense.
The grammar is fine, meaning is clear. Pronoun ambiguity has been removed. This piece of art seems good to be kept and taken ahead until we find a better version.
Parallelism
Goes out. Refer to Error Analysis 1.
Pronoun ambiguity has been removed form this sentence. It is clear that them refers to human emotions and researchers' has been introduced to eliminate pronoun ambiguity.
the two portions on wither side of the parallel marker "and" aren't parallel.
The meaning of the sentence is totally distorted. This can't be taken forward. Goes Out.
Answer Option C is the best option available.

As discussed before, the right answer here is C. One thing worth pointing out however is that most sentences have 2 major flash-points, and identifying them makes our task a lot easier.

In this case, one rule would be that if there are two consecutive verbs, the second one should be in the "to+infinitive" form. This immediately helps eliminate A, B, D.

E has a parallelism error, leaving us with C.

- Matoo

I could identify that the answer is option C, but I have a doubt regarding the pronoun them which is being used in option C.
Japanese researchers are producing a series of robots that can identify human facial expressions and then response to them; the researchers' primary goal is to create a robot that will empathize with us.

Here them can refer to both researchers and facial expressions.
robots that can identify human facial expressions and then response to researchers.
robots that can identify human facial expressions and then response to facial expressions.
Can someone please explain?

Hi ajaygaur319,

Pronoun ambiguity is not a major issue. Try to find other, more important entry points, and use concepts like awkwardness, ambiguity, redundancy, and use of the passive only if you cannot find a more reliable basis on which to eliminate an option.

Hi e-gmat. Could you please tell why them is not ambiguous here and can't refer to robots or researchers ?

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Concepts tested here: Pronouns + Verb Forms + Grammatical Construction

• A pronoun and its derivatives can only have one referent in a sentence.
• Information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
• Semicolons and the “comma + conjunction” construction are used to link two independent clauses; commas are used to link an independent clause with a dependent one; comma cannot be used to join two independent clauses.
• For referring to the intent/purpose of an action, the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb") is the preferred construction.

A:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the pronoun "they" to refer to "robots" and "their" to refer to "Japanese researchers"; remember, a pronoun and its derivatives can only have one referent in a sentence.
2/ Option A uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "creating" in this case) to refer to the intent behind the action "their goal is"; remember, for referring to the intent/purpose of an action, the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb") is preferred over the present participle ("verb+ing" - "creating" in this case).

B:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "responding" in this case) to refer to information that is permanent in nature; remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
2/ Option B incorrectly uses a semicolon to join the dependent clauses "then responding to them" and "primarily to create a robot that will empathize with us"; remember, semicolons and the “comma + conjunction” construction are used to link two independent clauses; commas are used to link an independent clause with a dependent one; comma cannot be used to join two independent clauses.

C: Correct.
1/ This answer choice correctly uses the sole pronoun "them" to refer exclusively to the noun "expressions".
2/ Option C correctly uses the simple present tense verb "respond" to refer to information that is permanent in nature.
3/ Option C correctly uses a semicolon to join the independent clauses "Japanese researchers are producing...them" and "the researchers' primary goal is...us".
4/ Option C uses the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb" - "to + create") to refer to the intent behind the action "the researchers' primary goal is"

D:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the pronoun "them" to refer to "expressions" and "their" to refer to "Japanese researchers"; remember, a pronoun and its derivatives can only have one referent in a sentence.
2/ Option D incorrectly uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "giving" in this case) to refer to information that is permanent in nature; remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
3/ Option D uses the noun phrase "creation of a robot that will empathize with us" to refer to the intent behind the action "their primary goal is"; remember, for referring to the intent/purpose of an action, the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb") is the preferred construction.

E:
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "responding" in this case) to refer to information that is permanent in nature; remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
2/ Option E uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "creating" in this case) to refer to the intent behind the action "the researchers' goal is"; remember, for referring to the intent/purpose of an action, the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb") is preferred over the present participle ("verb+ing" - "creating" in this case).

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



To understand the concept of "Infinitive" versus "Present Participle" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the use of punctuation on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~10 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team