|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Updated on: 12 Mar 2019, 12:16
Originally posted by yuktipoddar on 04 Oct 2018, 18:20.
Last edited by generis on 12 Mar 2019, 12:16, edited 4 times in total.
Last edited by generis on 12 Mar 2019, 12:16, edited 4 times in total.
Renamed the topic, edited the question and added the OA.
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
55% (01:35) correct
45%
(01:42)
wrong
based on 1278
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In a cardboard representation of nucleotide subunits, Watson and Crick, elaborating on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,accurately modeled the double-helix DNA.
(A) elaborating on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(B) elaborating on other scientists’ theories failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(C) elaborating on other scientists’ theories which have failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(D) elaborated on other scientists’ theories which fail to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(E) elaborated on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(A) elaborating on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(B) elaborating on other scientists’ theories failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(C) elaborating on other scientists’ theories which have failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(D) elaborated on other scientists’ theories which fail to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
(E) elaborated on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety,
Please explain which verb-ing form / verb-ed form will be used in the above answer?
Also explain the reasoning behind. Thanks in advance!
Please explain the rules for present participle in case a noun phrase is preceding?
Also explain the reasoning behind. Thanks in advance!
Please explain the rules for present participle in case a noun phrase is preceding?
04 Oct 2018, 18:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey yuktipoddar,
This is a really good example of prioritizing your decision points. This doesn't have to be a case of present versus past participles. It can be a case of tenses and complete versus incomplete sentences.
In terms of tenses, you know a few things: Watson and Crick modeled DNA - that means they did this in the past, since you have that -ed ending on modeled. That means that the scientists who came before needed to do their models before Watson and Crick did theirs. And since doing a model is something that ends, you know that process was done by the time Watson and Crick started. That means that you need "had failed" to correctly deal with that timeline. That eliminates everything except A and E.
Take a look at what happens if you have -ed in there (as it is in E): "In a cardboard representation of nucleotide subunits, Watson and Crick, elaborated on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety, accurately modeled the double-helix DNA." That first part (up to "entirety") would be a complete sentence if that comma wasn't there. You need that "-ing" ending in there to make it clear that you aren't trying to make a compound sentence (because if you were trying to make a compound sentence you'd need an "and" after that comma or you'd need to change "modeled" to "modeling")
This is a really good example of prioritizing your decision points. This doesn't have to be a case of present versus past participles. It can be a case of tenses and complete versus incomplete sentences.
In terms of tenses, you know a few things: Watson and Crick modeled DNA - that means they did this in the past, since you have that -ed ending on modeled. That means that the scientists who came before needed to do their models before Watson and Crick did theirs. And since doing a model is something that ends, you know that process was done by the time Watson and Crick started. That means that you need "had failed" to correctly deal with that timeline. That eliminates everything except A and E.
Take a look at what happens if you have -ed in there (as it is in E): "In a cardboard representation of nucleotide subunits, Watson and Crick, elaborated on other scientists’ theories which had failed to explain the nucleotide structures and pairings in their entirety, accurately modeled the double-helix DNA." That first part (up to "entirety") would be a complete sentence if that comma wasn't there. You need that "-ing" ending in there to make it clear that you aren't trying to make a compound sentence (because if you were trying to make a compound sentence you'd need an "and" after that comma or you'd need to change "modeled" to "modeling")
General Discussion
