A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as

A: as indicated
Here, it is not crystal clear WHAT is indicated.
Eliminate A.

B: A ruined structure...was indicated by its orientation.
This meaning is nonsensical:
An ORIENTATION cannot indicate a STRUCTURE.
Eliminate B.

but must serve to connect CONTRASTING IDEAS.
C: its eastward orientation and overall plan, but also the artifacts
Here, the usage of but is inappropriate, since the orientation, the plan and the artifacts are NOT contrasting ideas.
Rather, all three serve THE SAME FUNCTION: they indicate that the ruined structure was probably a church.
Eliminate C.

D: as indicates its eastward orientation and overall plan
Here, indicates (singular) does not agree with its eastward orientation and overall plan (plural subject).
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is E.

Hi kevinyuan136 and gibbet,

It will not be ok to replace or add 'as well as' or 'and'...
the role of 'as well as' is to lay extra emphasis on the preceding term, whereas 'and' lays equal emphasis..

now if you look at the Q
it lays emphasis on 'eastward orientation and overall plan' and less emphasis on 'artifacts'....
so you have to keep the original meaning..



TeamGMATIFY, the emphasis is the main reason and not to list out different things...
the different things would actually be mentioned as such..

That ... is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, and by the artifacts..."

Hope it helped

A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as artifacts, such as glass-oil lamp fragments, found at the site.

(A) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as “in its eastward orientation” and “by its overall plan” is not parallel to “artifacts”.

(B) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, once probably being a church, was indicated by its eastward orientation, overall plan, and “by its eastward orientation” and “its overall plan” is not parallel to “artifacts”.

(C) Indicating that a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church were its eastward orientation and overall plan, but also the “But” is usually used to introduce a contrasting idea.

(D) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicates its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as the “indicates” is a singular verb and “eastward orientation and overall plan” is a plural subject.

(E) That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the The construction is parallel. “is indicated by x and y as well as by z.”

- Nitha

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

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 the fact that a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the artifacts found there.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Tenses + Grammatical Construction

• “both A and B" or "A as well as B" are the correct usages; A and B must be parallel and comparable.
• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
• “not only A but also B” is the correct, idiomatic usage; A must be parallel to B.
• Any information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence cannot be included between two commas.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses the past participle "indicated" to refer to information that is permanent in nature; please remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense. Further, Option A fails to maintain parallelism between A ("in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan") and B ("artifacts") in the idiomatic construction "A as well as B"; please remember, "A as well as B" is a correct, idiomatic structure; A and B must be comparable and parallel.

B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan...was indicated...the site", incorrectly implying that the location of the structure was indicated by its eastward orientation, overall plan, and artifacts found there; the intended meaning is that the fact that a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the artifacts found there. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "being" in this sentence) to refer to an action that concluded in the past; please remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past. Additionally, Option B uses the passive voice construction "A ruined structure...was indicated", rendering it awkward and needlessly indirect.

C: This answer fails to maintain the correct, idiomatic construction "not only A ("eastward orientation and overall plan") but also B ("artifacts...found at the site")", as it omits the phrase "not only"; please remember, “not only A but also B” is the correct, idiomatic usage; A must be parallel to B.

D: This answer choice incorrectly uses the singular verb "indicates" to refer to the plural noun phrase "its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as the artifacts".

E: This answer choice correctly refers to the singular pronoun "That" with the singular verb "is indicated". Moreover, Option E uses the clause "That a ruined structure...was probably a church is indicated by...at the site", conveying the intended meaning - that the fact that a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the artifacts found there. Further, Option E correctly uses the simple past tense verb "was" to refer to an event that concluded in the past. Additionally, Option E maintains parallelism between A ("by its eastward orientation and by its overall plan") and B ("by the artifacts") in the idiomatic construction "A as well as B". Besides, Option E is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

Additional Note: Please keep in mind that the incorrect clause in Option B is partly formed due to the placement of the phrase "once probably being a church" between two commas; this phrase conveys information - that the ruined structure was probably a church - necessary to maintain the core meaning of the sentence; please remember, any information needed to maintain the core meaning of the sentence cannot be included between two commas.

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



To understand the concept of "Extra Information Between Commas" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

A ruined structure found at Aqaba,Jordan,was probably a church as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan,as well as artifacts,such as glass-oil lamp fragments,found at the site

A ruined.... phrase correctly modifies the structure Jordan.
The fact that it may be a church is indicated by 3 factors

its eastward direction
by its overall plan and
as well as artifacts

These 3 are found at site.

Now in given sentence all these 3 do not follow parallel construction with only one by for 2nd item. Hence A is wrong.

now going for other options

(B) A ruined structure found at Aqaba,Jordan,once probably being a church,was indicated by its eastward orientation,overall plan,and
once probably being a church............[color=#ff0000]gives a meaning error spoiled by once and being(for past tense).

(C) Indicating that a ruined structure found at Aqaba,Jordan,was probably a church were its eastward orientation and overall plan,but also the
Using Present continuous tense Indicating for past event is wrong. Also Jordan is a structure and it is not indicating sth. This is wrong meaning wise because of wrong modifier.
not only...........but also......... is also used wrongly

(D) A ruined structure found at Aqaba,Jordan,was probably a church,as indicates its eastward orientation and overall plan,as well as the
present tense indicates changes the whole meaning of the sentence.

(E)That a ruined structure found at Aqaba,Jordan,was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan,as well as by the
even though, Use of That in modifier part seems somewhat awkward to me, parallel structure in this sentence is well written without error.

That a ruined.... phrase correctly modifies the structure Jordan.
The fact that it may be a church is indicated by 3 factors

by its eastward direction and its overall plan
by artifacts

A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as artifacts, such as glass oil-lamp fragments, found at the site.

(A) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as
(B) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, once probably being a church, was indicated by its eastward orientation, overall plan, and
(C) Indicating that a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church were its eastward orientation and overall plan, but also the
(D) A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicates its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as the
(E) That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the

In (A) indicated by --in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as are not parallel.
In (B)once probably being -- incorrect
IN (C) Indicating that a ruined and but also ( the introduction of but also doesnt make sense) -- incorrect
IN (D) indicates is present
In(E) best

I agree that (E) is the best option available. But can someone explain this option in more detail please?

I felt it would be better if (E) goes like "That ... is indicated by its eastward orientation, overall plan, as well as artifacts...", instead of "That ... is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan, as well as by the artifacts..."

Thanks!

The statement in the given form talks about two different list of things, hence the given construction.
It talks about the "something related to architecture", as well as the "artifacts"

Does this help?

why a is wrong
indicated modify subject of main clause
A is
structure was a church as structure is indicated. no logic

Hi,

lets see why A is wrong and E is the correct choice..

A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicated in its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well as artifacts, such as glass oil-lamp fragments, found at the site....

1) indicated in" is not the correct usage indicated by.. is correct..
indicated in would be better used in a sentence like..
the route was indicated on the paper..
the war was imminent as per the news indicated in various newspaper..

2) 'by the ' is missing before the artifacts, so there is a parallelism issue...
if I remove other parallel issues, it would read..
]A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church, as indicatedin its eastward orientation and by its overall plan, as well asartifacts, such as glass oil-lamp fragments, found at the site...
as indicated artifacts, such as,... does not make sense..

Here, the that clause is only in the subject position and not the subject itself. The verb mood is passive, as indicated by the "is indicated" and therefore "that a ruined structure..." is a direct object.

There's no hard rule that "that clauses" must be in a certain position in the sentence, but there is a hard rule that the clause should be deployed wherever the meaning of the sentence is least ambiguous. Additionally, "that clauses" is a way to make the sentence more concise than a sentence with a series of modifiers. The alternative to the sentence above is somewhat messy: "A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, being probably a church is indicated by...." Quite difficult to understand

I hope this helps



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a very silly question,but felt to get it clear. In the above sentence "A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church" I thought found was acting as verb and therefore felt that there were 2 verbs 'found' , 'was' for 1 subject ruined structure. Please help me in understanding why found is not verb here

"Found" is not a verb, but a past participle modifier for "structure". Consider the following sentence:
A ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan.
This sentence does not make sense since the ruined structure did not find (someone else found the ruined structure) - hence "found" is not a verb.

Hi anilkumar1510, actually this is a case where a clause is acting as the subject of the sentence. The subject (clause) is:

That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church

The one important thing to note vis-a-vis this structure is that in such cases, the subject is always considered singular (and hence, the main verb of this sentence is singular is).

The structure of this sentence is:

<Subject clause> is indicated by X as well as by Y.

Where:

X: its eastward orientation and overall plan

Y: the artifacts, such as glass-oil lamp fragments, found at the site

Another similar official example:

That some fraternal twins resemble each other greatly while others look quite dissimilar highlights an interesting and often overlooked feature of fraternal-twin pairs, namely that they vary considerably on a spectrum of genetic relatedness.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses Noun Clause, its application and examples. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section

But what noun does it refer to?
The only noun in the sentence is "That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church".
This cant be the antecedent in the sentence.

Could you kindly explain this to me.
thanks

I am not sure whether you have doubt about the pronoun "it" or the pronoun "that"? "It" has no issues, since it clearly refers to "a ruined structure". ("That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church" is not a noun, but a subordinate clause.)

If your query is about the pronoun "that", then following is the explanation:

"That" does not necessarily refer to a noun - it may as well be used to introduce a clause. Compare with the following:

I know that I cannot solve difficult problems.

Here "that" introduces the clause "I cannot solve difficult problems". (The "that"-clause is the object of the verb "know")

Similarly in option E, "that" introduces the clause "a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church". This "that"-clause is the subject of the verb "is indicated".

That a ruined structure found at Aqaba, Jordan, was probably a church" is indicated by its eastward orientation and overall plan," is a substantive phrase acting as the noun for the entire clause with ' is indicated' as the verb. More about such structures in the following links.
1. https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/substantive
2. https://www.english-for-students.com/sub ... auses.html