Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 23:55 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 23:55
Close
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
aragonn
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Last visit: 30 Sep 2019
Posts: 1,170
Own Kudos:
5,939
 [7]
Given Kudos: 416
Products:
Posts: 1,170
Kudos: 5,939
 [7]
Kudos
Add Kudos
7
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
yash312
Joined: 28 Aug 2018
Last visit: 24 Feb 2025
Posts: 158
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 22
Posts: 158
Kudos: 179
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
surendrasaini1
Joined: 15 Feb 2017
Last visit: 08 Jan 2026
Posts: 242
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 50
Location: India
Schools: Stern '26
Schools: Stern '26
Posts: 242
Kudos: 126
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
ArupRS
Joined: 23 Jan 2018
Last visit: 02 Jul 2025
Posts: 246
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 358
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Products:
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
Posts: 246
Kudos: 253
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
After analyzing the meaning I came to below conclusion :

So X as Y means something - so damming as to wake up - Dammingness crosses the threshold to wake up the defendant from the state of complacency.
This situation rather demands consequence - The testimony was so damming that it woke up the defendant.....

Can someone please provide your thoughts and help me if I am missing something.

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Regards,
Arup
avatar
swopnilsadik27
Joined: 03 Sep 2018
Last visit: 24 Jul 2021
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 87
Posts: 1
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
+1 for C. Because of (So....As) structure.
avatar
sm86
Joined: 02 May 2018
Last visit: 04 May 2019
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 7
Posts: 15
Kudos: 24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke the defendant from his state of complacency.

A. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke
So X (Present Progressive) that Y (Past) is wrong. Either X or Y should be present or X should be in past progressive.

B. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was of such damning effect, it woke

C. So damning was Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial as to wake

D. Such was Leslie Shumway testimony’s damning effect during the Al Capone trial, it awakes
Wrong usage of Such and idiomatic mistake

E. There was so much damning effects, that Leslie Shumway testimony during the Al Capone trial woke
Meaning is changed. Indeed, became meaningless.
avatar
ArupRS
Joined: 23 Jan 2018
Last visit: 02 Jul 2025
Posts: 246
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 358
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Products:
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
Posts: 246
Kudos: 253
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ArupRS
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
After analyzing the meaning I came to below conclusion :

So X as Y means something - so damming as to wake up - Dammingness crosses the threshold to wake up the defendant from the state of complacency.
This situation rather demands consequence - The testimony was so damming that it woke up the defendant.....

Can someone please provide your thoughts and help me if I am missing something.

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Regards,
Arup

aragonn, GMATNinjaTwo, sudarshan22, GMATNinja, broall, hazelnut, Vyshak, generis daagh

Dear experts,

Can you please explain whether my above reasoning was correct? OA is option A.

Regards,
Arup
User avatar
generis
User avatar
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Last visit: 18 Jun 2022
Posts: 5,258
Own Kudos:
37,728
 [4]
Given Kudos: 9,464
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,258
Kudos: 37,728
 [4]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke the defendant from his state of complacency.

A. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke
B. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was of such damning effect, it woke
C. So damning was Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial as to wake
D. Such was Leslie Shumway testimony’s damning effect during the Al Capone trial, it awakes
E. There was so much damning effects, that Leslie Shumway testimony during the Al Capone trial woke

ArupRS
ArupRS
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
After analyzing the meaning I came to below conclusion :

So X as Y means something - so damming as to wake up - Dammingness crosses the threshold to wake up the defendant from the state of complacency.
This situation rather demands consequence - The testimony was so damming that it woke up the defendant.....

Can someone please provide your thoughts and help me if I am missing something.

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Regards,
Arup

aragonn, GMATNinjaTwo, sudarshan22, GMATNinja, broall, hazelnut, Vyshak, generis daagh

Dear experts,

Can you please explain whether my above reasoning was correct? OA is option A.

Regards,
Arup
Hi ArupRS , your reasoning is either 100% correct on both the consequence and pronoun issues,
or almost 100% correct.
I cannot tell whether you decided that (A) was okay because the noun 's possessive modifiers were just modifiers and hence "it" was allowed to stand for testimony,
or whether you (and many aspirants) adhere to a "possessive poison" pronoun rule that is not quite accurate, or at least is not absolute.
Either way, nice work!

CONSEQUENCE? Yes.
The sentence that I highlighted above is well-reasoned.

You are correct that "this situation rather demands consequence,"
so if an idiom is involved, we need one that shows consequence.

So X that Y.
The witness's testimony was SO damaging to Al Capone THAT the testimony changed his complacent (smug) attitude.

You: The testimony was so damning that it woke up the defendant.....
Yep, spot on.

• PRONOUNS? - correct result. Reasoning?

Quote:
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
You are correct that the pronoun it refers to testimony.

What comes before a possessive noun, N, is an adjective that answers the question, "WHOSE N?"
Adjectives are in italics:
-- Lila's raincoat/ her raincost
-- 3M's stock price/ its stock price
-- Kelly and Kristen's house / their house

You thus correctly realized that the possessive name before "testimony" was a descriptor of the noun (an adjective, in this case),
not the noun itself.

Careful, though. I cannot tell whether you relied on the possessive poison rule.
The possessive pronoun rule is controversial at best and occasionally not observed by the GMAC at worst.

The possessive poison pronoun rule

Strong form of poison pronoun rule followed by some grammarians but not by GMAC:
-- The possessive poison rule states that if the antecedent noun is in the possessive form, only a possessive pronoun may refer to the noun.

Correct according to the strict poison pronoun rule: Timothy's mother wanted his help to lift the box.
Object pronoun not okay: Timothy's mother wanted him to help her lift the box.
Subject pronoun not okay: Timothy's mother decided that he should help her lift the box.

• GMAC's position: Sometimes the a possessive noun can be followed by an object or subject pronoun.

(1) An object pronoun (HER, HIM, THEM) can refer to a possessive noun. (More common than #2)

HERE is a CORRECT official example in which an object pronoun MUST refer to a possessive noun; all of the answer choices contain the object pronoun HER:
Spoiler alert: correct answer to an official question is given.
Among the objects found in the excavated temple were small terra-cotta effigies left by supplicants who were either asking the goddess Bona Dea's aid in healing physical and mental ills or thanking her for such help.

(2) A subject pronoun (she, he, they) CAN refer back to a possessive noun (rare)

This (2) situation seems to be acceptable only if other answers have indisputable errors.
This is my example of a construction that GMAC has allowed (see the post I cite below).
The antecedent for she is the possessive descriptor (adjective) Eleanor Roosevelt's.

Although Eleanor Roosevelt's positions created much more backlash than those of her husband, FDR,
some historians believe that she was the better political thinker.


I discuss the "poison pronoun" rule's evolution in THIS POST, HERE.
In it I discuss and link to an official question in which the poison pronoun rule is not observed.
That official question has remained in official guides for four years. It was not a mistake.

ArupRS , nice work.
I hope the reply answers your question. :)
User avatar
aragonn
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Last visit: 30 Sep 2019
Posts: 1,170
Own Kudos:
5,939
 [1]
Given Kudos: 416
Products:
Posts: 1,170
Kudos: 5,939
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
aragonn

Project SC Butler: Day 50: Sentence Correction (SC2)


For SC butler Questions Click Here

Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke the defendant from his state of complacency.

A. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke

B. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was of such damning effect, it woke

C. So damning was Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial as to wake

D. Such was Leslie Shumway testimony’s damning effect during the Al Capone trial, it awakes

E. There was so much damning effects, that Leslie Shumway testimony during the Al Capone trial woke

The best/excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.
There may be no best/excellent answers, or a there may be a few excellent answers!

Official Explanation:


Something is so X that Y is a common idiomatic construction. (A) correctly follows this construction: Leslie Shumway’s testimony was so damning that it woke.
Thanks to generis for the detail explanation.
avatar
ArupRS
Joined: 23 Jan 2018
Last visit: 02 Jul 2025
Posts: 246
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 358
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Products:
GMAT 2: 700 Q49 V36 (Online)
Posts: 246
Kudos: 253
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
generis
Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke the defendant from his state of complacency.

A. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was so damning that it woke
B. Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial was of such damning effect, it woke
C. So damning was Leslie Shumway’s testimony during the Al Capone trial as to wake
D. Such was Leslie Shumway testimony’s damning effect during the Al Capone trial, it awakes
E. There was so much damning effects, that Leslie Shumway testimony during the Al Capone trial woke

ArupRS
ArupRS
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
After analyzing the meaning I came to below conclusion :

So X as Y means something - so damming as to wake up - Dammingness crosses the threshold to wake up the defendant from the state of complacency.
This situation rather demands consequence - The testimony was so damming that it woke up the defendant.....

Can someone please provide your thoughts and help me if I am missing something.

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Regards,
Arup

aragonn, GMATNinjaTwo, sudarshan22, GMATNinja, broall, hazelnut, Vyshak, generis daagh

Dear experts,

Can you please explain whether my above reasoning was correct? OA is option A.

Regards,
Arup
Hi ArupRS , your reasoning is either 100% correct on both the consequence and pronoun issues,
or almost 100% correct.
I cannot tell whether you decided that (A) was okay because the noun 's possessive modifiers were just modifiers and hence "it" was allowed to stand for testimony,
or whether you (and many aspirants) adhere to a "possessive poison" pronoun rule that is not quite accurate, or at least is not absolute.
Either way, nice work!

CONSEQUENCE? Yes.
The sentence that I highlighted above is well-reasoned.

You are correct that "this situation rather demands consequence,"
so if an idiom is involved, we need one that shows consequence.

So X that Y.
The witness's testimony was SO damaging to Al Capone THAT the testimony changed his complacent (smug) attitude.

You: The testimony was so damning that it woke up the defendant.....
Yep, spot on.

• PRONOUNS? - correct result. Reasoning?

Quote:
So X as Y - is a correct idiom. Hence I chose option C at first blush. My reasoning was "it", a pronoun, cannot refer back to Leslie Shumway’s testimony.
Now I believe it actually refers to the testimony, not to Leslie Shumway’s testimony. So option A is not wrong.
You are correct that the pronoun it refers to testimony.

What comes before a possessive noun, N, is an adjective that answers the question, "WHOSE N?"
Adjectives are in italics:
-- Lila's raincoat/ her raincost
-- 3M's stock price/ its stock price
-- Kelly and Kristen's house / their house

You thus correctly realized that the possessive name before "testimony" was a descriptor of the noun (an adjective, in this case),
not the noun itself.

Careful, though. I cannot tell whether you relied on the possessive poison rule.
The possessive pronoun rule is controversial at best and occasionally not observed by the GMAC at worst.

The possessive poison pronoun rule

Strong form of poison pronoun rule followed by some grammarians but not by GMAC:
-- The possessive poison rule states that if the antecedent noun is in the possessive form, only a possessive pronoun may refer to the noun.

Correct according to the strict poison pronoun rule: Timothy's mother wanted his help to lift the box.
Object pronoun not okay: Timothy's mother wanted him to help her lift the box.
Subject pronoun not okay: Timothy's mother decided that he should help her lift the box.

• GMAC's position: Sometimes the a possessive noun can be followed by an object or subject pronoun.

(1) An object pronoun (HER, HIM, THEM) can refer to a possessive noun. (More common than #2)
SPOILER ALERT: answer to an official question.

Here is a CORRECT official example in which an object pronoun MUST refer to a possessive noun; all of the answer choices contain the object pronoun HER:

Among the objects found in the excavated temple were small terra-cotta effigies left by supplicants who were either asking the goddess Bona Dea's aid in healing physical and mental ills or thanking her for such help.
That question is HERE.

(2) A subject pronoun (she, he, they) CAN refer back to a possessive noun (rare)

Acceptable, perhaps only if other answers have indisputable errors:
Although Eleanor Roosevelt's positions created much more backlash than those of her husband, FDR,
some historians believe that she was the better political thinker.


I discuss the "poison pronoun" rule's evolution in THIS POST, HERE.
In it I discuss and link to an official question in which the poison pronoun rule is not observed.
That official question has remained in official guides for four years. It was not a mistake.

ArupRS , nice work.
I hope the reply answers your question. :)

generis Thank you for such a brilliant explanation. I was not aware of any rule such as possessive poison. Going through the concepts.
I was aware of two rules:

X's Y ---> we can use a pronoun that refers to Y.
X's Y ----> cannot use a pronoun, such as it, she or he, which refers to X, but the possessive form of that pronoun, such as its, her Y, etc can be used.

Regards,
Arup
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,426
Own Kudos:
Posts: 19,426
Kudos: 1,010
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts