Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gan

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION



THE PROMPT

• Meaning?
Observations by police of large concentrations of gang members in an area are consistent with the growth of crime in that area.

• Things to know
→ how the word which may be used

→ possessive poison is not an issue in this question and regardless, is not ironclad rule

→ I really want you to understand what a reduced relative clause is.
I don't care about the jargon. I do care about whether you understand these things, because GMAC uses them frequently.

→ the correct idiom is consistent with, not consistent to

THE OPTIONS

• which has no antecedent
→ which must refer to an actual noun that precedes it.
→ the verb after which is singular and the only possible antecedent is plural
-- which could refer to large concentrations of gang members in the west end of the Meadowvale district but the verb following which would have to be plural.
-- which cannot refer to "police detectives have observed XYZ."
Those words are not a noun.
→ Which could modify observations, for example, but the actual word observations does not exist in this sentence.

• consistent to is not idiomatic. The idiom is consistent with.
ELIMINATE A


• compared to the growth of crime in A, D, and E, in this option, THE crime's growth is weird.
→ The word "the" makes growth of "the" crime too specific; it seems as though we are reading about a certain kind of crime.
Watch:
Correct, crime is a general noun: The committee delivered a report on crime in Kansas.
Probably wrong, crime is a specific noun: The committee delivered a report on the crime in Kansas.
→ In English, the article "the" can distort the meaning of a noun. We often do not use "the" in front of "general" nouns such as
crime, people, states (in the U.S.), cities, pollution, women, men, children, teenagers, industry

• On the GMAT, inanimate nouns do not usually take the possessive form with an apostrophe-S
Careful, though. What I just wrote is a guideline that works most of the time. Not always.

• I see no other errors.
KEEP, but look for a better answer



• "ITS growth of crime" is weird. The phrasing is not exactly wrong, but it's weird. And awkward.

• the correct idiom is consistent with, not consistent to

• the possessive pronoun its can refer to the non-possessive noun the west end
→ Correct: The small business could not afford to keep its employees.
→ Correct: The New Zealand rugby team is known for its ferocious haka dance.

→ some of you are referring to "possessive poison," which is not an issue in this sentence, though I can understand how you might think it were an issue

-- "possessive poison" means that a possessive noun allegedly may not be referred to by a non-possessive pronoun
-- I wrote a post about this subject and used quite a few official examples to demonstrate that this "rule" is by no means ironclad.
-- You can read that post if you click here.

ELIMINATE C


• I see no errors

• in this option, the growth of crime is better than crime's growth in option B. Eliminate (B).

• findings consistent is short for findings that are consistent.
→ we are dealing with a reduced relative clause (see Notes)
→ we are also dealing with a summative modifier
• findings is a good way to summarize what the previous clause is talking about.
→ The "findings" phrase (which summarizes the idea in the preceding clause) is called a summative modifier.
Summative modifiers rename and elaborate on another part of the sentence. Summative modifiers are appositives.

KEEP


• the growth of the crime not only distorts meaning but also makes no sense.
→ Now we are really tied to a specific crime. The growth of which crime? Thievery? Assault? Drug dealing?
ELIMINATE E

The answer is D.

Notes

The phrase findings consistent comes from a reduced relative clause, namely, findings that are consistent.

Reduced relative clauses are very common in good writing and on the GMAT.
Let's break down "reduced relative clause":
→ Reduced means shortened.
→ The "relative" part refers to a relative pronoun such as that, who, or which.
→ These relative pronouns are followed by clauses -- by groups of words that contain a subject and verb.

In order to shorten the relative clause findings that are consistent and change it into the summative modifier findings consistent:
1) remove the relative pronoun (that);
2) remove the TO BE verb, are
3) do not move the word consistent, which should follow findings.

Original: Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end . . ., findings that are consistent with the growth of crime in the area.

Reduced clause: Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end . . . , findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area.

Findings is a summative modifier of Undercover detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end . . .
Findings is a "new" word that describes (summarizes) the idea in the previous clause.

You can read a short and very good overview about reduced relative clauses HERE.

COMMENTS

Chandan5793 , welcome to SC Butler.

I like the dialogue on the thread.
I also like the answers, even if there were a couple of reasoning errors here and there.
Kudos to all who explained, even if the explanation wobbled occasionally. This question is challenging. Nicely done.
Stay safe, all.

Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end of the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there.

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there // "which is" illogically refers to the west end of the district. Plus, "where" is ideal.

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings // "crime's growth" sounds awkward. D is better

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime // "consistent to" is unidiomatic.

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area // correct

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there // D is better.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end of the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there.

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there
(since it is a place- Meadowvale District- that this option referes to, 'where' would have been correct. ) Out

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings (which changes to where but overall this option distorts the meaning with the use of phrase'crime's growth')

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime ( option C and D are close but C can be immediately ruled out because of the use of the idiom 'consistent to'. 'Consistent with' is the correct usage.

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area
( The clause after 'findings...' correctly modifiers the clause prior to it. It also sorts the idiom error as mentioned earlier.)
( best so far)


E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there (wrong modifier. 'consitent ...' the modifier used distorts meaning of the first half of the statement.)

OA : D

Posted from my mobile device

mighty generis please underline the highlighted part which is consistent to the growth of crime there.

gmat1393 , edited. Thank you.
_________________

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there - which is referring to district

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings - changes meaning

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime - 'consistent with' is idiomatic, 'the distric of Meadowale is the better usage.

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area - concise

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there - misses a crucial word that is 'findings'

Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end of the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there.

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there
Which Wrong use
Incorrect

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings
Incorrect

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime
its- error
Incorrect

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area
Correct Choice
No Error

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there
What is consistent ?
Incorrect

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there
Idiom error since "consistent to" should be "consistent with". "which" should be "where" since its referring to Meadowvale.

I also think "growth in" is better than "growth of". The former is used for values like statistics, whereas the latter is for things like plants.

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings
Uses "the crime" which implies a specific type of crime. "the" seems unnecessary in front of "crime's"

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime
Same idiom error as in A.

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area
Correct. "Findings..." noun phrase clearly refers to the observations made by the police.

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there
"consistent" is an adjective that modifies the observations, but placement is not the best since it comes after Meadowvale.

So it all boils down to option (C) and (D)

(C) - uses the possessive pronoun "its" - It should have a corresponding possessive noun to refer to. Which we don't have in this case.
It's okay even if you don't know the correct idiom usage "consistent to/consistent with"!

(D) - eliminates any pronoun ambiguity.

Hope this helps!

I don't think the antecedent has to be possessive. It can just be a regular noun. In this case, there's still ambiguity I believe since "its" could refer to the west end or to the Meadowvale district as a whole. Let me know if I'm wrong.

Undercover police detectives have observed large concentrations of gang members in the west end of the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there.

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there

POE

the growth of crime consistent with observed things or findings, not with the west end

A & B - which, where modify 'the west end', place cannt be consistent with the growth of crime

E- what consistent with the growth of the crime?

C & D - D is better than C

C - pronoun error, it refers what?

Answer - D
_________________

The official explanation is here.

A) the Meadowvale district, which is consistent to the growth of crime there
What is which refering to is not perfect in the sentence
therefore out

B) the Meadowvale district, where the crime’s growth is consistent with these findings
the crime is refering to particular crime which is not the case

C) the Meadowvale district, findings consistent to its growth of crime
it's is the problem here what is it refering is not providing conclusive answer therefore out

D) the district of Meadowvale, findings consistent with the growth of crime in the area
The meaning is perfect and the usage too therefore let us hang on to it

E) the district of Meadowvale, consistent with the growth of the crime there
what is consistent is not answered therefore out

Therefore IMO D

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________