Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

 It is currently 21 Jul 2019, 12:15

### 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

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

# Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2013
Posts: 61
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Dec 2017, 13:23
saarthak299 wrote:
can anyone explain why B is wrong ? it because of placement of *IT* after and makes the sentence confusing? otherwise please give reason.

Hey Saarthak

See; scientists belief was before Howard proved. So, instead of Scientists believed, it should be "scientists had believed" because this actually occurred earlier than Howard proved. That's the main reason of dropping B.

As far as the placement of "its" is concerned, I dont see it is referring anything other than Phlogiston. It's fine there from its usage perspective.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1524
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Dec 2017, 22:38
alokgupta1009 wrote:
saarthak299 wrote:
can anyone explain why B is wrong ? it because of placement of *IT* after and makes the sentence confusing? otherwise please give reason.

Hey Saarthak

See; scientists belief was before Howard proved. So, instead of Scientists believed, it should be "scientists had believed" because this actually occurred earlier than Howard proved. That's the main reason of dropping B.

As far as the placement of "its" is concerned, I dont see it is referring anything other than Phlogiston. It's fine there from its usage perspective.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

"it" can actually refers to "a substance". B has many flaws; this is common in gmat.
Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2017
Posts: 46
GMAT 1: 600 Q42 V31
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2017, 05:35
Option A - Correct --> Proper contrast is established between Tammy H and many scientists, past perfect (had) clearly confirms the action prior to the 18th century and phlogiston is clearly described after a comma.
Option B - Incorrect --> Original sentence does not call for any parallel structure as presented in option B (X and Y)
Option C - Incorrect --> Awkward wording + unclear meaning.
Option D - Incorrect --> Improper comparision of phlogiston with TH.
Option E - Incorrect --> Change of meaning from original intended meaning.
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 224
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
GPA: 4
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2018, 10:01
AjiteshArun , MagooshExpert

Shouldn't the main clause start with "phlogiston" as the subordinate clause "Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century" should modify "phlogiston" instead of "many scientists"??

That was the reason why I eliminated A,B, and E on;y to arrive at the wrong choice?
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4781
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2018, 11:38
Top Contributor
Sarath wrote

Quote:
can anyone explain why B is wrong ? it because of placement of *IT* after and makes the sentence confusing? otherwise please give reason.

many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood

B. many scientists believed that phlogiston was an imaginary substance released by combustion and its properties were not fully understood

B changes the meaning. The scientists' belief was about the release of phlogiston by combustion and not about phlogiston being an imaginary substance.
_________________
The Take-Away: Grammar First and Then the Rest
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2017
Posts: 186
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V32
GPA: 4
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2018, 11:53
Between A and E. A takes the cake because in E.... Believe that... Was... And was an imaginary substance. Many scientists did not believe that it was an imaginary substance and this belief did not change in the 18th century. This changes the intended meaning. So they should not be in parallel. Thats why A is correct.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________
Regards,

Vaibhav

Sky is the limit. 800 is the limit.

~GMAC
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 231
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2018, 15:41
1
Prateek176 wrote:
AjiteshArun , MagooshExpert

Shouldn't the main clause start with "phlogiston" as the subordinate clause "Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century" should modify "phlogiston" instead of "many scientists"??

That was the reason why I eliminated A,B, and E on;y to arrive at the wrong choice?

Hi Prateek176!

There's no reason that the main clause should start with "phlogiston". The idea here is that scientists held a particular belief until Tammy Howard proved that belief wrong. The main clause should be talking about what the scientists believed, and so the subject should be "many scientists". There is no action associated with "phlogiston" here, so it should not be the subject of the clause.

Hope that helps!
-Carolyn
_________________
Director
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 781
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2018, 09:39
this is wrong question.
until+point of time in the past
must go with simple past, not had done.

there are many og questions which test this point.
if i am wrong, pls email me. my email is thanghnvn@gmail.com
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 224
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
GPA: 4
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2018, 08:59
MagooshExpert wrote:
Prateek176 wrote:
AjiteshArun , MagooshExpert

Shouldn't the main clause start with "phlogiston" as the subordinate clause "Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century" should modify "phlogiston" instead of "many scientists"??

That was the reason why I eliminated A,B, and E on;y to arrive at the wrong choice?

Hi Prateek176!

There's no reason that the main clause should start with "phlogiston". The idea here is that scientists held a particular belief until Tammy Howard proved that belief wrong. The main clause should be talking about what the scientists believed, and so the subject should be "many scientists". There is no action associated with "phlogiston" here, so it should not be the subject of the clause.

Hope that helps!
-Carolyn

MagooshExpert , daagh

Sorry but i am not fully convinced.

The opening Modifier is "Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,". This modifier modifies "Phlogiston was believed.......". Doesn't this construction show the belief which was contradicted by Tommy Howard??
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4781
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2018, 13:31
Top Contributor
Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century, many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood

A. many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully undeB.ood
B . many scientists believed that phlogiston was an imaginary substance released by combustion and its properties were not fully understood
C. phlogiston was an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood and which many scientists had believed was released by combustion
D. phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood, was believed by scientists to be released by combustion
E, many scientists had believed that phlogiston was released by combustion and was an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood.

Quote:
Shouldn't the main clause start with "phlogiston" as the subordinate clause "Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century" should modify "phlogiston" instead of "many scientists"??

That was the reason why I eliminated A,B, and E only to arrive at the wrong choice?

Prateek

The difference between a subordinate clause and a modifier should be appreciated first. While an introductory modifier phrase has to necessarily modify its due noun that it is entitled to, the introductory subordinate clause is under no such obligation. Look at the analysis herein.
[/color]

A. Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century, many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood
If choice A were to start with a modifier, then your point would hold good. --Until Tammy Howard's proof otherwise, in the 18th century, phlogiston was believed to have been released by combustion and so on. However, one can see the convoluted structure such a sentence with a passive voice, etc. There is not even a pronoun such as 'it' to refer to the phlogiston in the subordinate clause. Therefore, 'many scientists' is better than phlogiston to start the main clause.

2. B changes the meaning that Phlogiston was believed to be an imaginary substance. The scientists only believed that combustion released phlogiston.

_________________
The Take-Away: Grammar First and Then the Rest
Re: Until Tammy Howard proved otherwise in the 18th century,   [#permalink] 13 Aug 2018, 13:31

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 30 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by