Last visit was: 28 Apr 2026, 06:52 It is currently 28 Apr 2026, 06:52
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
avatar
BrijeshABB
Joined: 24 Jun 2014
Last visit: 23 Oct 2014
Posts: 3
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
mikemcgarry
User avatar
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Last visit: 06 Aug 2018
Posts: 4,474
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 130
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,474
Kudos: 30,891
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
neha338
Joined: 03 Jun 2014
Last visit: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 32
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 32
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
mikemcgarry
User avatar
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Last visit: 06 Aug 2018
Posts: 4,474
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 130
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,474
Kudos: 30,891
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
neha338
Dear Mike,
As you said, there is no such rule. The same logic will be applied to verb and other forms? but what if the sentence creates ambiguity. Suppose i have to modify the third item in a list of three with a relative clause (A,B,C, who will ....), then this will always create confusion whether this who is for A,B or C.
I have one example from one of the magazine
The Ice-Cube detector, with its array of 5,160 sensors located over a cubic kilometre of pure ice, and buried more than 1.5 km under the south pole, has been designed and built specifically to detect high-energy neutrinos from space.
If I go by logic, the first underlined part relates to 2nd entity while the 2nd underlines to both preceding entities. But, other thought also says that underlined part can modify in other ways also, if i shift the underlined part entity one by one to both entity in first and in second underlined part, restrict the part to 2nd entity only.

Brijesh
In this sentence ...
The Ice-Cube detector, with its array of 5,160 sensors located over a cubic kilometre of pure ice, and buried more than 1.5 km under the south pole, has been designed and built specifically to detect high-energy neutrinos from space.
... there is absolutely zero ambiguity, absolutely no logical problem. This is a question that could be a correct answer on the GMAT SC. You are analyzing too much, and you are missing the point. You are creating problems where there are none. You are approaching GMAT SC too much an a left-brain, rule-based, analytical mode. You need to cultivate the right-brain skills: intuition, the subtleties of context, innuendo, patterns of grammar & logic, etc.

This blog is about math, but the discussion is directly relevant to how you are approaching grammar:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/how-to-do- ... th-faster/

Does this make sense?
Mike