goel asked me to come and address this instance of the "it" in option B. This is a confusing one - I was just discussing this one recently with a tutoring student. Let's strip the sentence down a little:
The army... is <something>... and took <some people> more than 36 years to complete... (it?)
The army took <some people> more than 36 years to complete.
The army took <some people> more than 36 years to complete it.
What does "it" refer to - what was being completed? The army. So the second sentence reads:
The army took some people more than 36 years to complete the army.
Did the army take a certain amount of time to complete itself? No. The army took some time to complete. So we don't want to mention the army again at the end of the sentence.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
pyramids of Egypt
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
goelmohit2002
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
Thanks a lot Stacey.Stacey Koprince wrote:goel asked me to come and address this instance of the "it" in option B. This is a confusing one - I was just discussing this one recently with a tutoring student. Let's strip the sentence down a little:
The army... is <something>... and took <some people> more than 36 years to complete... (it?)
The army took <some people> more than 36 years to complete.
The army took <some people> more than 36 years to complete it.
What does "it" refer to - what was being completed? The army. So the second sentence reads:
The army took some people more than 36 years to complete the army.
Did the army take a certain amount of time to complete itself? No. The army took some time to complete. So we don't want to mention the army again at the end of the sentence.
But can you please tell why the same principle is not followed in the below question ( source
OG-10, Q183)https://www.beatthegmat.com/archaeologis ... 10269.html
Can you please tell what is the difference between the current sentence and the sentence at the above link ?
post deletedgoelmohit2002 wrote:Can someone please tell which grammar rule is broken by inclusion of "it" in option B ?vivek.kapoor83 wrote:i couldnt get the meaning of sentence. it wants to say that ...army was created and creation was complete when 7000 artsian were included,then we can read as
army took 2000years and 7000 artisan to complete..So, 'it' is not needed
Last edited by real2008 on Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
goelmohit2002
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
IMO itself is a reflexive pronoun....that is used to describe the action that somebody do on himself.....e.g.real2008 wrote:Had it been ITSELF in place of IT, the choice B would be ok.goelmohit2002 wrote:Can someone please tell which grammar rule is broken by inclusion of "it" in option B ?vivek.kapoor83 wrote:i couldnt get the meaning of sentence. it wants to say that ...army was created and creation was complete when 7000 artsian were included,then we can read as
army took 2000years and 7000 artisan to complete..So, 'it' is not needed
He cut his hand by knife himself....
Action = cut
Action performed by = He
Action performed on = He
How the same is applicable here....Can you please tell.....
Please tell in case I am misinterpreting you.
Considering your example, I find my explanation is surely wrong...Now, I will delete my post not to create confusion..goelmohit2002 wrote:IMO itself is a reflexive pronoun....that is used to describe the action that somebody do on himself.....e.g.real2008 wrote:Had it been ITSELF in place of IT, the choice B would be ok.goelmohit2002 wrote:Can someone please tell which grammar rule is broken by inclusion of "it" in option B ?vivek.kapoor83 wrote:i couldnt get the meaning of sentence. it wants to say that ...army was created and creation was complete when 7000 artsian were included,then we can read as
army took 2000years and 7000 artisan to complete..So, 'it' is not needed
He cut his hand by knife himself....
Action = cut
Action performed by = He
Action performed on = He
How the same is applicable here....Can you please tell.....
Please tell in case I am misinterpreting you.
I'm not native speaker, but can anybody explain me:
If the right answer is C, which is without "IT", why don't we use passive form?
For me, the army can not complete itself. So, it should BE completed.
where is my mistake?
If the right answer is C, which is without "IT", why don't we use passive form?
For me, the army can not complete itself. So, it should BE completed.
where is my mistake?
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Kebab, the conjugated verb in this instance is not "complete" - it's "took"
Let's say I'm making a sculpture of a cat.
"The cat took me three days to complete."
The verb is "took" - the cat took. The "to complete" is associated with "me" - the cat took ME three days TO COMPLETE. "Me" is doing the action indicated by the infinitive (to complete). Does that make more sense?
Let's say I'm making a sculpture of a cat.
"The cat took me three days to complete."
The verb is "took" - the cat took. The "to complete" is associated with "me" - the cat took ME three days TO COMPLETE. "Me" is doing the action indicated by the infinitive (to complete). Does that make more sense?
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
In that other one, the sentence is a bit different. I assume you want to know the difference between A and B? This is more about idiomatic usage.But can you please tell why the same principle is not followed in the below question ( source Smile OG-10, Q183)
https://www.beatthegmat.com/archaeologis ... 10269.html
The chalice was buried to keep from being stolen.
The chalice was buried to keep it (the chalice) from being stolen.
In the former instance, when an action is done "to keep from" some other action, the implication is that the subject in question purposely did the first action in order to prevent the second action from occurring. Did the chalice bury itself to keep from being stolen? Nope.
A correct usage might be:
I hid myself to keep from having to do the dishes after dinner.
Vs. "to keep IT from" means that something or someone else performed an action on something to keep seem other action from happening to that something. Someone buried the chalice to keep the chalice from being stolen.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
