Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 23:28 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 23:28
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
505-555 Level|   Verb Tense/Form|               
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
 [1]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 06 Aug 2020, 19:54
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
akd5
I have some doubts about "have hung" within answer choice E. Have hung is present perfect, so it started in the past and continues into the future (could just be the effect that continues into the future, but in this case, it's safe to say that the hanging is still occuring). Given this, how come it can't match the present perfect within the non-underline? One of the experts mentioned that it's saying these actions (the actions in the present perfect tense) are simultaneous. Why is this the case? Is it because they're both in the present perfect? If verbs are in the same tense, are they occuring simulataneously?
Show more
The tenses can match that way. They don't have to match though. So, the matching of tenses in the version created via the use of (E) is matching where matching is not necessary that tempts the test-taker into choosing the incorrect choice.
User avatar
ChiranjeevSingh
User avatar
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 411
Own Kudos:
3,058
 [1]
Given Kudos: 154
Status:Private GMAT Tutor
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V85 DI85
GMAT Focus 2: 735 Q90 V85 DI85
GMAT Focus 3: 735 Q88 V87 DI84
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
GRE 1: Q170 V168
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT Focus 3: 735 Q88 V87 DI84
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
GRE 1: Q170 V168
Posts: 411
Kudos: 3,058
 [1]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 28 Oct 2020, 04:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here's the official explanation provided by the GMAC for this question:

The subject of the main clause is visitors , which should be followed by two verbs using the same tense: have looked and have seen . Have does not need to be repeated in the second verb; it is entirely correct simply to let it be understood. The modifying clause whose arms and legs illogically refers to branches , which immediately precedes it, rather than to monkeys . Replacing the clause with the phrase with arms and legs hanging corrects this error.

Option A: Saw is the wrong verb tense; the clause incorrectly modifies branches

Option B: Saw is the wrong verb tense; the clause does not modify monkeys

Option C: Saw is the wrong verb tense

Option D: Correct. The verb tense is correct in this sentence, and the phrase correctly modifies monkeys .

Option E: The clause modifies branches rather than monkeys ; have hung is the wrong tense

The correct answer is D.

Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.
avatar
itsarudolf
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2019
Last visit: 29 Oct 2023
Posts: 52
Own Kudos:
30
Given Kudos: 622
Location: Germany
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.1
WE:Operations (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
Posts: 52
Kudos: 30
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 12 Feb 2021, 06:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hey DmitryFarber

although this is quite an easy question, I am still confused about whether in A, B, E "monkeys" can be modified by "whose" or not. I read quite differing explanations in this post and therefore I am puzzled.

Generally, I understand that -ing modifier / -ed modifier / relative pronoun modifier can jump over:

1. Prepositional phrase
2. Appositive phrase
3. Any other kind of noun modifier (not perfectly sure about this one)

Thereby the prerequisite needs to be fulfilled that 1./2./3. describes in a restrictive or non-restrictive manner the preceding noun, cannot be moved elsewhere and the description makes sense.

Am I right? If not, please correct.

In this question we have a noun + -ing modifier that modifies the noun + relative pronoun modifier.

DmitryFarber you explain that it is not just a noun, which is referred back to here, but a noun doing something, which is the reason why you exclude A, B, E as valid options (regardless of other errors). IMO "sleeping on the branches" just describes the "monkeys" similar to a prepositional/appositive phrase and therefore complies with the thoughts I stated before. Hence, a valid combination with "whose" in A, B, E might be possible. What do you think?

Maybe GMATNinja, MartyTargetTestPrep or mikemcgarry can also have a word on this one. I would really appreciate someone helping out. I struggle quite often with modifiers that could jump over other ones and did not find a clear explanation on this topic covering all possible variations.

Cheers
Rudolf
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [4]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
 [4]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 12 Feb 2021, 19:32
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
rudywip
Hey DmitryFarber

although this is quite an easy question, I am still confused about whether in A, B, E "monkeys" can be modified by "whose" or not. I read quite differing explanations in this post and therefore I am puzzled.

Generally, I understand that -ing modifier / -ed modifier / relative pronoun modifier can jump over:

1. Prepositional phrase
2. Appositive phrase
3. Any other kind of noun modifier (not perfectly sure about this one)

Thereby the prerequisite needs to be fulfilled that 1./2./3. describes in a restrictive or non-restrictive manner the preceding noun, cannot be moved elsewhere and the description makes sense.

Am I right? If not, please correct.

In this question we have a noun + -ing modifier that modifies the noun + relative pronoun modifier.

DmitryFarber you explain that it is not just a noun, which is referred back to here, but a noun doing something, which is the reason why you exclude A, B, E as valid options (regardless of other errors). IMO "sleeping on the branches" just describes the "monkeys" similar to a prepositional/appositive phrase and therefore complies with the thoughts I stated before. Hence, a valid combination with "whose" in A, B, E might be possible. What do you think?

Maybe GMATNinja, MartyTargetTestPrep or mikemcgarry can also have a word on this one. I would really appreciate someone helping out. I struggle quite often with modifiers that could jump over other ones and did not find a clear explanation on this topic covering all possible variations.

Cheers
Rudolf
Show more
Often, you can get insights regarding SC issues by using simpler examples, doing something similar to plugging in numbers in quant. Let's try that here.

    The people playing the music, who were from Ireland, smiled the entire time.

Looks good to me.

So, we have part of our answer.

However, in case of this "monkeys sleeping on the branches" example, we have a slightly different situation.

Let's try this one.

    We have seen people playing music, whose country of origin was Ireland.

Notice that this is a different situation. I don't know the exact linguistic term here, but "playing music" is not just a restrictive modifier in this case. It's a component of what "we have seen."

We didn't see a thing "people playing music." We saw a scenario in which people were playing music. So, the idea that "people playing music" is one noun phrase that is logically modified by "whose country of origin was Ireland" doesn't really hold here. In fact, what would make more sense is the following.

    We have seen people whose country of origin was Ireland playing music.

So, getting back to the monkeys question, even if "whose" didn't seem to refer to "branches," the structure doesn't seem logical, not because "whose" can't jump a verb-ing modifier but because, in this case, the noun + verb-ing modifier is not a simple noun phrase focused on the monkeys. It represents a scenario. So, "whose" would not really be referring to the monkeys. It would be illogically referring to a scenario.
avatar
itsarudolf
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2019
Last visit: 29 Oct 2023
Posts: 52
Own Kudos:
30
Given Kudos: 622
Location: Germany
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.1
WE:Operations (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
Posts: 52
Kudos: 30
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 13 Feb 2021, 00:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyTargetTestPrep
rudywip
Hey DmitryFarber

although this is quite an easy question, I am still confused about whether in A, B, E "monkeys" can be modified by "whose" or not. I read quite differing explanations in this post and therefore I am puzzled.

Generally, I understand that -ing modifier / -ed modifier / relative pronoun modifier can jump over:

1. Prepositional phrase
2. Appositive phrase
3. Any other kind of noun modifier (not perfectly sure about this one)

Thereby the prerequisite needs to be fulfilled that 1./2./3. describes in a restrictive or non-restrictive manner the preceding noun, cannot be moved elsewhere and the description makes sense.

Am I right? If not, please correct.

In this question we have a noun + -ing modifier that modifies the noun + relative pronoun modifier.

DmitryFarber you explain that it is not just a noun, which is referred back to here, but a noun doing something, which is the reason why you exclude A, B, E as valid options (regardless of other errors). IMO "sleeping on the branches" just describes the "monkeys" similar to a prepositional/appositive phrase and therefore complies with the thoughts I stated before. Hence, a valid combination with "whose" in A, B, E might be possible. What do you think?

Maybe GMATNinja, MartyTargetTestPrep or mikemcgarry can also have a word on this one. I would really appreciate someone helping out. I struggle quite often with modifiers that could jump over other ones and did not find a clear explanation on this topic covering all possible variations.

Cheers
Rudolf
Often, you can get insights regarding SC issues by using simpler examples, doing something similar to plugging in numbers in quant. Let's try that here.

    The people playing the music, who were from Ireland, smiled the entire time.

Looks good to me.

So, we have part of our answer.

However, in case of this "monkeys sleeping on the branches" example, we have a slightly different situation.

Let's try this one.

    We have seen people playing music, whose country of origin was Ireland.

Notice that this is a different situation. I don't know the exact linguistic term here, but "playing music" is not just a restrictive modifier in this case. It's a component of what "we have seen."

We didn't see a thing "people playing music." We saw a scenario in which people were playing music. So, the idea that "people playing music" is one noun phrase that is logically modified by "whose country of origin was Ireland" doesn't really hold here. In fact, what would make more sense is the following.

    We have seen people whose country of origin was Ireland playing music.

So, getting back to the monkeys question, even if "whose" didn't seem to refer to "branches," the structure doesn't seem logical, not because "whose" can't jump a verb-ing modifier but because, in this case, the noun + verb-ing modifier is not a simple noun phrase focused on the monkeys. It represents a scenario. So, "whose" would not really be referring to the monkeys. It would be illogically referring to a scenario.
Show more

Hey MartyTargetTestPrep

Thanks for your detailed reply!

What do you think about the following variation of your sentence?

We have seen people playing music, who smiled the entire time. -> IMO who refers unambiguously to people although a scenario is described before.

Cheers
Rudolf
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
 [2]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 13 Feb 2021, 09:33
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
rudywip
Hey MartyTargetTestPrep

Thanks for your detailed reply!

What do you think about the following variation of your sentence?

We have seen people playing music, who smiled the entire time. -> IMO who refers unambiguously to people although a scenario is described before.

Cheers
Rudolf
Show more
It's all pretty subtle. You know?

If the emphasis is on the people themselves, the sentence is fine. If the emphasis is on the scenario, the sentence does not make sense.,

I guess, in this case, the presence of the relative clause "who smiled ..." forces us to intepret the sentence as focusing on the people.
avatar
itsarudolf
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2019
Last visit: 29 Oct 2023
Posts: 52
Own Kudos:
30
Given Kudos: 622
Location: Germany
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.1
WE:Operations (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Judge '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
Posts: 52
Kudos: 30
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 13 Feb 2021, 10:35
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyTargetTestPrep
rudywip
Hey MartyTargetTestPrep

Thanks for your detailed reply!

What do you think about the following variation of your sentence?

We have seen people playing music, who smiled the entire time. -> IMO who refers unambiguously to people although a scenario is described before.

Cheers
Rudolf
It's all pretty subtle. You know?

If the emphasis is on the people themselves, the sentence is fine. If the emphasis is on the scenario, the sentence does not make sense.,

I guess, in this case, the presence of the relative clause "who smiled ..." forces us to intepret the sentence as focusing on the people.
Show more

Got it now, Marty. It all depends on the meaning and the other answer choices you can choose from. No rule is fixed and no choice can be excluded as long it is the best of the best choices or related to 700+ Qs sometimes just the best of the worst.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
kittle
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2021
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 318
Own Kudos:
161
 [1]
Given Kudos: 618
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 318
Kudos: 161
 [1]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 03 Sep 2021, 05:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
It would be good to note in this question thatt "With" modifier acts as an "action modifier". Eg- Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging

Here the "with" modifier is modifying the action of sleeping, basically telling how the monkeys were sleeping
User avatar
Rickooreo
User avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2021
Last visit: 15 Feb 2023
Posts: 302
Own Kudos:
30
Given Kudos: 240
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: ISB '24 Moore '25
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
GPA: 3.95
WE:Real Estate (Consulting)
Schools: ISB '24 Moore '25
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
Posts: 302
Kudos: 30
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 15 Aug 2022, 01:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
",with" construction is in most cases wrong. Can someone please elaborate cases where - ,with construction is right
Also, here, doesn't it seem for option D that ",with" is modifying "branches" ? branches with arms - leading to wrong meaning
User avatar
mahantakash
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2019
Last visit: 01 Feb 2024
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 42
Location: India
Schools: ISB '23 LBS '24 NUS Rotman '24
Schools: ISB '23 LBS '24 NUS Rotman '24
Posts: 3
Kudos: 1
 [1]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 15 Aug 2022, 04:40
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Rickooreo
",with" construction is in most cases wrong. Can someone please elaborate cases where - ,with construction is right
Also, here, doesn't it seem for option D that ",with" is modifying "branches" ? branches with arms - leading to wrong meaning
Show more

Hi Rickooreo,

It's true that "with" construction is in most cases wrong. But the important point to note here is that, it is not always wrong. Please refer to the "Most Helpful Expert Reply" by mikemcgarry. It's very clearly explained there.

Regarding your 2nd query, whether "with" seems to be modifying branches. I will try to explain why it is not.
For Prepositional phrases , it's not necessary that it will modify the nearest noun, which is branches in this case. Rather, they should modify something that makes clear and logical sense in the sentence. Therefore, 'with arms and legs hanging' is actually modifying Monkeys in this case, and not branches (although it's the closest noun).

- aM
User avatar
mcepeci
User avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2018
Last visit: 30 Jun 2025
Posts: 20
Posts: 20
Kudos: 0
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 24 Mar 2023, 09:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If all three actions (looked,saw and hang) occurred in the same time frame, then shouldn't they be in the same tense.

Why can't the last action be have hung for this problem. Thanks for your help.
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
 [1]
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 24 Mar 2023, 09:48
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mcepeci
If all three actions (looked,saw and hang) occurred in the same time frame, then shouldn't they be in the same tense.

Why can't the last action be have hung for this problem. Thanks for your help.
Show more
"Have hung" could perhaps work if the sentence were written in a certain way. Also, "have been hanging" would work well.

However, in this question, the sentence version that uses "have hung," the (E) version, has a major modifier error. So, that version is flawed for reasons other than its use of tenses.

Meanwhile, in the correct version, only one tense is used. "Hanging" is a participle in that version, not a finite verb. So, it has no tense.
User avatar
ashutosh_73
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Last visit: 30 Oct 2024
Posts: 234
Own Kudos:
1,636
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
Posts: 234
Kudos: 1,636
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 24 Jul 2023, 22:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
DmitryFarber
Yeah, we definitely can't jump there. Typically, we only jump over a noun modifier when the whole phrase is referring to one thing: "I brought a bag of food and toys, which I opened for all to see." Since "sleeping on branches" describes what the monkeys are doing, it's not really all one thing in the same way, so we read "whose" as applying to the nearest noun.

As for "have hung," it's fake-out parallelism. Just because we use present perfect in the main core of the sentence, that doesn't mean we need it in our modifier. It implies that the monkeys' arms and legs HAVE HUNG at some time, but not necessarily at the time that people saw the monkeys. Remember that present participles (-ing) are not verbs, but rather time-neutral modifiers. I can say "I saw people leaving the store," "I see people leaving the store," or even "I will see people leaving the store." The -ing form is not an indicator of time; it just makes a modifier, and thus works very well for our purpose here.
Show more


Hi DmitryFarber

Below is my understanding from your above explanation. Is this correct?

1) ''HAVE HUNG'' seems(fake) parallel to ''HAVE LOOKED UP'' & ''HAVE SEEN''. The subject of ''HAVE LOOKED UP'' & ''HAVE SEEN'' is Visitors, which shows the simultaneous action. But ''HAVE HUNG'' seems to denote a different action, which may/maynot has anything to do with the previous clause, the reason this option is incorrect??

Option E) Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and ''seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung'' like socks on a clothesline.

Also, I think, use of ''WHOSE'' shouldn't be the sole basis to remove option E. ''Whose'' can logically modify ''Monkeys'', as branches wouldn't have arms and legs.

Thanks :please: :please:
User avatar
AWasey
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jan 2019
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 174
Own Kudos:
37
Given Kudos: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: Booth '26 (S) CBS '26 Duke '26 Haas '26 (S) HBS '26 (S) INSEAD Jan '27 Kellogg '26 LBS '26 Sloan '26 Stanford '26 (S) Wharton  '26 (S) Yale '26
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V36
GMAT 2: 730 Q51 V38
GMAT 3: 770 Q51 V45
GPA: 4
WE:Project Management (Technology)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Booth '26 (S) CBS '26 Duke '26 Haas '26 (S) HBS '26 (S) INSEAD Jan '27 Kellogg '26 LBS '26 Sloan '26 Stanford '26 (S) Wharton  '26 (S) Yale '26
GMAT 3: 770 Q51 V45
Posts: 174
Kudos: 37
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 13 Oct 2023, 09:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The challenge i see here is: The Exception cases of Relative pronoun modifiers
Here, "Sleeping on the branches" is modifying monkeys and can't be placed anywhere else in the sentence. Also, Brances having arms and legs makes no sense. Hence, the Relative pronoun can jump over the additional modifier about noun and refer to 'Monkeys'

Please clarify


ExpertsGlobal5
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
IrinaOK
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline.

(A) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang
(B) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs were hanging
(C) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(D) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
(E) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung


Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and seen monkeys that were sleeping on the branches, and the monkeys' arms and legs hung like socks on a clothesline.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Verb Forms + Parallelism

• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
• The simple past continuous tense is used to refer to actions that took place in the past over a period of time.
• The simple present tense is used to indicate actions taking place in the current time frame, indicate habitual actions, state universal truths, and convey information that is permanent in nature.
• The present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.
• In the “noun + comma + phrase” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.
• “who/whose/whom/which/where”, when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses “whose arms and legs…” to refer to “branches”, illogically implying that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the branches; the intended meaning is that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the monkeys; please remember, “who/whose/whom/which/where”, when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma. Moreover, Option A incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” (rather than the past participle “seen”) with the helping verb “have”, which is used as part of the present perfect and present perfect continuous verb constructions; in simple words, “have…saw” is incorrect whereas “have…seen” is the correct usage. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” to refer to an action that began and concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; present perfect tense is correct for such usage. Additionally, Option A incorrectly uses the simple present tense verb “hang” to refer to an action that took place in the past over a period of time; remember, the simple past continuous tense is used to refer to actions that took place in the past over a period of time, and the simple present tense is used to indicate actions taking place in the current time frame, indicate habitual actions, state universal truths, and convey information that is permanent in nature.

B: This answer choice incorrectly uses “whose arms and legs…” to refer to “branches”, illogically implying that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the branches; the intended meaning is that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the monkeys; please remember, “who/whose/whom/which/where”, when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma. Moreover, Option B incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” (rather than the past participle “seen”) with the helping verb “have”, which is used as part of the present perfect and present perfect continuous verb constructions; in simple words, “have…saw” is incorrect whereas “have…seen” is the correct usage. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” to refer to an action that began and concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; present perfect tense is correct for such usage.

C: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” (rather than the past participle “seen”) with the helping verb “have”, which is used as part of the present perfect and present perfect continuous verb constructions; in simple words, “have…saw” is incorrect whereas “have…seen” is the correct usage. Further, Option C incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb “saw” to refer to an action that began and concluded in the past but continues to affect the present; present perfect tense is correct for such usage.

D: Correct. This answer choice avoids the modifier error seen in Options A, B, and E, as it uses the phrase “with arms and legs”, rather than a “who/whose/whom/which" phrase, conveying the intended meaning of the sentence- that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the monkeys. Further, Option D correctly uses the present perfect tense verb “have…seen” to describe an event that began and concluded in the past but continues to affect the present. Additionally, Option D correctly uses the present participle (“verb+ing” – “hanging” in this sentence) to refer to an action that took place over a period of time in the past; remember, the present participle can be used to refer to actions that are continuous in nature, in any time period.

E: This answer choice incorrectly uses “whose arms and legs…” to refer to “branches”, illogically implying that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the branches; the intended meaning is that the arms and legs that hung like socks belonged to the monkeys; please remember, “who/whose/whom/which/where”, when preceded by a comma, refer to the noun just before the comma. Additionally, Option E incorrectly uses the present perfect tense verb “have hung to refer to an action that took place in the past over a period of time; please remember, the simple past continuous tense is used to refer to actions that took place in the past over a period of time, and the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to describe events that concluded in the past but continue to affect the present.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the concept of "Present Perfect Tense" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



To understand the concept of "Simple Continuous Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Show more
User avatar
AWasey
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jan 2019
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 174
Own Kudos:
37
Given Kudos: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: Booth '26 (S) CBS '26 Duke '26 Haas '26 (S) HBS '26 (S) INSEAD Jan '27 Kellogg '26 LBS '26 Sloan '26 Stanford '26 (S) Wharton  '26 (S) Yale '26
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V36
GMAT 2: 730 Q51 V38
GMAT 3: 770 Q51 V45
GPA: 4
WE:Project Management (Technology)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Booth '26 (S) CBS '26 Duke '26 Haas '26 (S) HBS '26 (S) INSEAD Jan '27 Kellogg '26 LBS '26 Sloan '26 Stanford '26 (S) Wharton  '26 (S) Yale '26
GMAT 3: 770 Q51 V45
Posts: 174
Kudos: 37
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 13 Oct 2023, 09:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Whose - Can modify Things and People both and i have seen on questions on the forum where Whose modifies animals

ankurgupta03
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline.

(A) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs hang
Whose cannot modify animals
(B) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs were hanging
Whose cannot modify animals
(C) saw monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
saw is not the right tense used because the tense should be parallel to have often looked up
(D) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, with arms and legs hanging
Correct
(E) seen monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose arms and legs have hung
Whose cannot modify animals

Now regarding your doubts:

1) According to the OE, "whose" modifies "branches". However, in other official questions I have seen that sometimes the clause modifier doesn't modify the closest noun. Actually, it can modify the main noun in a noun phrase as long as it makes sense and it is not ambiguous.
In this case, we have "monkeys sleeping on the branches, whose..."; "monkeys" is the main noun of that noun phrase and makes sense with "arms and legs hang like socks on a clothesline".
So, my question is: Is the split "whose....", a good reason to eliminate some choices?
The answer choice containing whose can simply be eliminated, because on the GMAT, whose can only modify people and here it seems to modify monkeys.

2) What are the rules related to a prepositional phrase after a comma? In this question: "..., with arms and legs hanging". How could we know that the prepositional phrase refers to the monkeys and not the visitors. Because these modifiers modify the entire clause, usually modifies the subject (visitors).
normally a prepositional phrase can be placed anywhere, but generally it is placed closest to the noun being modified, in this case the monkeys.
Show more
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,835
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,835
Kudos: 986
Visitors to the park have often looked up into the leafy canopy and 25 Jul 2025, 07:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts