Sentence Correction

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

real2008,

Please remeber to post OA with questions so this discussoin can be effective and productive. If you don't have OA, please let us know.

What is the official answer please?

the OA is A.

the modifying phrase however, seems odd.

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

In B, ownership of the pre-Columbians incorrectly implies that the pre-Columbians themselves were being owned. Eliminate B.

In C, respected (adjective) and a pre-Columbian form (noun) are not parallel. Also, it is unclear what exactly is being respected. Eliminate C.

in D, it is unclear what noun is being modified by the phrase in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected. The pronoun which must be standing in for another noun in the sentence. What exactly was the pre-Columbian form of ownership in? In the land? In the ownership of land? Neither makes sense. Eliminate D.

In E, the modifier that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership is incorrectly modifying the noun land. The land cannot have been a pre-Columbian form of ownership. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is A. Not the most elegant sentence, but better than the rest.

In A, what had been a pre-communal form of ownership is in apposition to the noun phrase communal ownership of land.

thanks for the detailed explanation.

to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

what preposition to is doing here .? I mean to which, how doe sit modify the intended noun ?

GMATGuruNY wrote:

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

In B, ownership of the pre-Columbians incorrectly implies that the pre-Columbians themselves were being owned. Eliminate B.

In C, respected (adjective) and a pre-Columbian form (noun) are not parallel. Also, it is unclear what exactly is being respected. Eliminate C.

in D, it is unclear what noun is being modified by the phrase in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected. The pronoun which must be standing in for another noun in the sentence. What exactly was the pre-Columbian form of ownership in? In the land? In the ownership of land? Neither makes sense. Eliminate D.

In E, the modifier that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership is incorrectly modifying the noun land. The land cannot have been a pre-Columbian form of ownership. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is A. Not the most elegant sentence, but better than the rest.

In A, what had been a pre-communal form of ownership is in apposition to the noun phrase communal ownership of land.

Hi Mitch, I have a doubt about E,

We have read that "OF" is just another middle man and its a good practice to strike it off.


At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

By looking at this solution, I feel that my practice is wrong. Maybe for a while if we can forget about this question, what will you advice for the real GMAT questions?

Strike off all "Of middlemen"?

I have also been striking off all the prepositional phrases, would also these under special conditions this practice need to be checked?

OA is A.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/mexican-agra ... 38060.html

E is incorrect because it refers to the land as a form of ownership. It is corrected in option A.

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

GMATGuruNY wrote:

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

In B, ownership of the pre-Columbians incorrectly implies that the pre-Columbians themselves were being owned. Eliminate B.

In C, respected (adjective) and a pre-Columbian form (noun) are not parallel. Also, it is unclear what exactly is being respected. Eliminate C.

in D, it is unclear what noun is being modified by the phrase in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected. The pronoun which must be standing in for another noun in the sentence. What exactly was the pre-Columbian form of ownership in? In the land? In the ownership of land? Neither makes sense. Eliminate D.

In E, the modifier that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership is incorrectly modifying the noun land. The land cannot have been a pre-Columbian form of ownership. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is A. Not the most elegant sentence, but better than the rest.

In A, what had been a pre-communal form of ownership is in apposition to the noun phrase communal ownership of land.

Hi Mitch,

Can you please explain a little more about the incorrectness of option D. I am very poor at SC, but I am trying to put my understanding of this sentence. Please correct me

Here is how I see this statement:
The most radical - modifying faction
faction - the subject
that of Zapata and his followers - modifying faction
proposed - verb
return -object
to communal ownership - modifying return
of land - modifying ownership
a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards - subordinate clause

Somehow, I dont see any ambiguity in the reference of 'which' in option D. 'Which' in option D is next to land and I believe it must refer the land. Again 'A land in which pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards' seems perfectly fine to me

Please help me get this straight

Regards,
Vishal

GMATGuruNY wrote:

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

In B, ownership of the pre-Columbians incorrectly implies that the pre-Columbians themselves were being owned. Eliminate B.

In C, respected (adjective) and a pre-Columbian form (noun) are not parallel. Also, it is unclear what exactly is being respected. Eliminate C.

in D, it is unclear what noun is being modified by the phrase in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected. The pronoun which must be standing in for another noun in the sentence. What exactly was the pre-Columbian form of ownership in? In the land? In the ownership of land? Neither makes sense. Eliminate D.

In E, the modifier that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership is incorrectly modifying the noun land. The land cannot have been a pre-Columbian form of ownership. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is A. Not the most elegant sentence, but better than the rest
In A, what had been a pre-communal form of ownership is in apposition to the noun phrase communal ownership of land.

HI Mitch, Why "That" in choice E cannot refer to the the communal form of ownership of land? I have seen examples in the OG in which "that" dose not refer to the immediately preceding noun but to some other noun. That is a bit flexible modifier as per the OG. For Example. Diagnostic test OG 13 Problem 50.

By developing the secure digital music..... is an example of what i am saying. Can you please clarify this point.

Thanks

GMATGuruNY wrote:

real2008 wrote:At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards.

1. land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards
2. land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards
3. land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership
4. land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards
5. land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

In B, ownership of the pre-Columbians incorrectly implies that the pre-Columbians themselves were being owned. Eliminate B.

Dear Mitch,

I have question related to choice B:

1- Why did you imply the 'pre-Columbians themselves were being owned'? I understood it as 'pre-Columbians themselves owns something? or could be interpreted 'ownership that belongs to pre-Columbians? i.e. I think it boils down how you interpret the construction of 'Noun1 of Noun2'. Then how do you interpret the construction in choice A 'a pre-Columbian form of ownership'.

Please elaborate a bit as it is really confusing.

2- Regardless of meaning in choice B, Can 'a form........and respected......' be parallel?

Thanks

Mo2men wrote:Dear Mitch,

I have question related to choice B:

1- Why did you imply the 'pre-Columbians themselves were being owned'? I understood it as 'pre-Columbians themselves owns something? or could be interpreted 'ownership that belongs to pre-Columbians? i.e. I think it boils down how you interpret the construction of 'Noun1 of Noun2'. Then how do you interpret the construction in choice A 'a pre-Columbian form of ownership'.

Please elaborate a bit as it is really confusing.

ownership of X implies that X is owned.
ownership of the car --> The car is owned.
ownership of the team --> The team is owned.
ownership of the pre-Columbians -- > The pre-Columbians are owned.
The phrases in blue make sense.
The phrase in red is nonsensical.

a pre-Columbian form of ownership = a TYPE OF OWNERSHIP practiced by the pre-Columbians.

2- Regardless of meaning in choice B, Can 'a form........and respected......' be parallel?

Thanks

and must serve to connect PARALLEL FORMS.
B: a form...and respected
Here, and incorrectly serves to connect a NOUN (form) to a MODIFIER (respected).
Eliminate B.

GMATGuruNY wrote:
ownership of X implies that X is owned.
ownership of the car --> The car is owned.
ownership of the team --> The team is owned.
ownership of the pre-Columbians -- > The pre-Columbians are owned.
The phrases in blue make sense.
The phrase in red is nonsensical.

a pre-Columbian form of ownership = a TYPE OF OWNERSHIP practiced by the pre-Columbians.

In light of you explanation above, in OG12 the Gall's hypothesis:

what does 'Gall's hypothesis of different mental functions' mean? How do you interpret it?

thanks

Mo2men wrote:

a pre-Columbian form of ownership = a TYPE OF OWNERSHIP practiced by the pre-Columbians.

In light of you explanation above, in OG12 the Gall's hypothesis:

what does 'Gall's hypothesis of different mental functions' mean? How do you interpret it?

thanks

Conveyed meaning:
A TYPE OF HYPOTHESIS -- a hypothesis of different mental functions -- is attributed to Gall.

GMATGuruNY wrote:
ownership of the team --> The team is owned.

The phrase in red is nonsensical.

Is ownership of the team the same as team's ownership?

Another questions, is 'Peter's birthday' same as 'birthday of Peter'? Can 'Peter's birthday' means 'birthday belongs to Peter'?

Thanks in advance