While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking

Question

While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies,  they may be disastrous for airlines, whose  operations – already losing money – could be plunged into bankruptcy.

(A) they may be disastrous for airlines, whose
(B) they may potentially cause disaster for airlines in that their
(C) for airlines they may be disastrous, because their
(D) for airlines, it may be disastrous in that their
(E) it may potentially cause disaster for airlines, whose

doe007 · Answer

Explanation:

This question is aimed to test many errors at the same time. Most prominent is the usage of two sets of pronouns -- they/it and whose/their. Other aspects tested are parallelism and redundancy.

(A)  Correct .
- "high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies" is parallel to "they may be disastrous for airline".
- "they" is correctly referring to "high oil prices".
- "whose" is correctly modifying "airlines".
- No redundancy.

(B) Wrong.
- "may potentially" is redundant. The sentence can have either "may" or "potentially".
- Placing of "their" is ambiguous -- "their" may refer to "airlines" or "high oil prices".

(C) Wrong.
- "high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies" is not parallel to "for airlines they may be disastrous".
- Placing of "their" is ambiguous -- "their" may refer to "airlines" or "high oil prices".

(D) Wrong.
- Singular pronoun "it" has the plural antecedent "high oil prices".
- Placing of "their" is ambiguous -- "their" may refer to "airlines" or "high oil prices".
- "high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies" is not parallel to "for airlines, it may be disastrous".

(E) Wrong.
- Singular pronoun "it" has the plural antecedent "high oil prices".
- "may potentially" is redundant. The sentence can have either "may" or "potentially".
- "high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies" is not parallel to "it may potentially cause disaster for airlines".

Correct answer is A.

ankurgupta03 · Answer

While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies, they may be disastrous for airlines, whose operations – already losing money – could be plunged into bankruptcy.

(A) they may be disastrous for airlines, whose
 correct 
(B) they may potentially cause disaster for airlines in that their
 awkward and wordy 
(C) for airlines they may be disastrous, because their
 the antecedent of they, their in not clear 
(D) for airlines, it may be disastrous in that their
 It cannot be a pronoun for plural "high oil prices" 
(E) it may potentially cause disaster for airlines, whose
 It cannot be a pronoun for plural "high oil prices"

daagh · Answer

This differential treatment of ‘they’ in A as clear and acceptable, while in C, it is ambiguous and rejectable, is worrisome. In addition, rejecting B on awkwardness and wordiness, isn’t strong enough'

Not happy with this example; Are there an OA and OE from the source?

Not happy with this example; Are there an OA and OE from the source?

doe007 · Answer

This question is from Kaplan and OA is already entered.

There are other reasons for rejecting B and C -- I will post the OE after a little more discussions.

HumptyDumpty · Answer

(A) they may be disastrous for airlines, whose 
Correct because "they" is parallel to "high oil prices" and "whose" clearly modifies "airlines".
 (B) they may potentially cause disaster for airlines in that their 
"may potentially" is pleonastic, "cause disaster..." is unidiomatic.
 (C) for airlines they may be disastrous, because their 
"because their" is ambiguous. "Their" can refer to either "airlines" or "oil prices".
 (D) for airlines, it may be disastrous in that their 
The first comma is invalid, "it" is not congruent with "prices".
 (E) it may potentially cause disaster for airlines, whose 
"it" is not congruent with "prices", "may potentially" is pleonastic.

doe007 · Answer

You arrived at the correct answer. 
In the analysis part, there are more specific reasons to discard option B. For option C, "they" is not ambiguous, but "their" is ambiguous.

abhishekdadarwal2009 · Answer

While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking companies, they may be disastrous for airlines, whose operations – already losing money – could be plunged into bankruptcy.
 
(A) they may be disastrous for airlines, whose  they refer to high oil prices,whose refer to airlines. correct 
 (B) they may potentially cause disaster for airlines in that their  change of meaning as high prices being disastrous is different from high prices causeing a disaster
 (C) for airlines they may be disastrous, because their incorrect structure because their is ambigous.
 (D) for airlines, it may be disastrous in that their  it is wrongly refering to high oil prices
 (E) it may potentially cause disaster for airlines, whose  it is wrongly refering to high oil prices

krikre · Answer

I understand that we need to use "they" to refer to  prices   (plural) but isn't it then creating an ambiguity as "they" could refer to both  prices   and  companies ?

krikre · Answer

But how do you know that "they" in the first option refers to  prices  and not  companies ? What is the rule here please?

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

We don't always have ambiguity when there is more than one possible antecedent for a pronoun, as long as the intended antecedent is clear. Here, it's pretty clear that trucking companies aren't disastrous for airlines. This doesn't fit the overall meaning of the sentence, which contrasts the effect of oil prices on two different types of companies. Also, the structure of the sentence points us toward the correct antecedent. If we start a sentence with "While X does this, it," the expectation is that "it" refers back to the subject, "X," and we'd have to clarify if we intended anything else. This works the same for objects as for subjects. If I say "I like jam on toast, but I also like it by itself," the structure leads us to believe that "it" refers to the first object ("jam"), not the noun from the modifier ("toast"). If I mean that I like toast by itself, I need to supply that noun rather than use a pronoun. Here's a good official example: https://gmatclub.com/forum/by-offering- ... 35470.html

Speaking of official examples, the problem in this post is clearly inspired by this official question, so we can be sure this is just fine on the GMAT: https://gmatclub.com/forum/qotd-while-d ... 43182.html

Helium · Answer

Very elegant OE provided by Kaplan.

The underlined portion contains two pronouns ("they" and "whose"), so check that they are being used properly. "They" clearly refers to the oil prices, and "whose" clearly refers to airlines. The pronouns match up clearly and logically. There appears to be no error.

(A) and (B) begin with "they," (C) and (D) begin with "for," and (E) begins with "it."

(B) contains a couple of problems. First, the phrase "may potentially" is redundant. If something "may" happen, that already implies potential. There is no need for both words. Further, the pronoun "their" at the end is ambiguous, as it could refer to oil prices or airlines. That eliminates (B).

The first half of the sentence begins with "While," making it a dependent clause. What follows the comma should be an independent clause (i.e., a sentence that can stand by itself). There's no need for the conjunction "for" as the first half is already dependent. That eliminates (C) and (D).

The potential cause of disaster is "oil prices," which is a plural noun. That should be replaced with "they," not "it." That eliminates (E).

There is no error in the original sentence, and all other answer choices are flawed. That makes (A) the correct answer.

daagh · Answer

The mechanical contention of the OE that in C, 'their' might refer to the high oil price is untenable because after all oil prices have no operations. At best, their might refer to either the airlines or the truck companies. Therefore, 'they' and their'indeed refer to two different entities, and that is what makes C incorrect. 
In general, who or what can go bankrupt? Is it a person, a company, or an operation?

DharLog · Answer

https://gmatclub.com/forum/qotd-while-d ... 43182.html - the similar question, explained by GmatNinja. And more: https://gmatclub.com/forum/qotd-in-some ... hilit=QOTD

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

While high oil prices may be problematic for some trucking

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards