Sentence Correction

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers


OA=D. But I have confusions between A, D and E as they all somewhere mean the same thing...

Could anybody help in understanding each of the options given:

I would just request you to underline the relevant part under study, It helps people like us.

I think all the option stated ( A,D and E) by you are gramatically correct, I cannot find any fault in them. But stylistically D is superior - the point lies in concision.

between D and E :

"a red coloured car" is more concise and simple that
"car that is red in colour"

So D wins over E.

Left with A and D.

In A "were" is a be verb, and what followed be verb always characterized the subject. So what can follow the be verb is a noun, adjective and at times an adverb.

John is a writer and a poet - here "writer and poet" is an noun predicate telling us more about john. We can write in a more concise way.

The writer and poet John....(the "thelonious monk" sc from OG-12 use this same construction)


Hope this helps !!

[email protected] wrote:In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

In A, B and C, an automobile manufacturer...agreed to pay...for CARS does not convey the intended meaning. The manufacturer agreed to pay not for the CARS themselves but for what it DID to the cars: it TEST-DROVE the cars WITH THEIR ODOMETERS DISCONNECTED. The wording in A, B and C could imply that the manufacturer was PURCHASING the cars -- quite the opposite of the intended meaning. Eliminate A, B and C.

In E, the combination agreed...were test-driven (both past tense) implies that the two actions took place at the same time. To convey the proper sequence of events, the latter verb should be in the past perfect tense: the manufacturer agreed to pay...for having cars that HAD BEEN test-driven.

The correct answer is D.

Only D conveys the intended meaning, that the manufacturer agreed to pay for what it DID to the cars: an automobile manufacturer...agreed to pay...for HAVING TEST-DRIVEN cars WITH THEIR ODOMETERS DISCONNECTED.

In D, having test-driven is a GERUND -- a verb functioning as a noun. For WHAT did the manufacturer pay? For HAVING TEST-DRIVEN the cars. HAVING + past participle implies PRIOR ACTION. Thus, D conveys the proper sequence of events: the manufacturer agreed to pay (in the past) for its PRIOR ACTION (having test-driven the cars, even further in the past).

GMATGuruNY wrote:
In D, having test-driven is a GERUND -- a verb functioning as a noun. For WHAT did the manufacturer pay? For HAVING TEST-DRIVEN the cars. HAVING + past participle implies PRIOR ACTION. Thus, D conveys the proper sequence of events: the manufacturer agreed to pay (in the past) for its PRIOR ACTION (having test-driven the cars, even further in the past).

Hi Mitch Sir,

I have a doubt here.

Gerund and participle(as an adjective) are a form of verbs that are in infinite form. The form of these remain same in whatever tense we write a sentence.

Jessica is a charming lady - "charming" is an adjective. Even if we write it in a past tense the form of the gerund "charming" is same.

Jessica was a charming lady.

My question is do the participle,when it are not a main verb, or a gerund signifies the time sequence of an action ? Because the change in time sequence will only change the main verb, or the first word of the main verb, and not the gerund or the participle(when it are not a main verb).

I got D from stylistic point by considering "having test-driven cars" as a subject noun, which is more concise than the rest. I didnt knew that gerund do also signifies time sequence.

Please help. Am I going wrong anywhere.

[quote="GMATGuruNY"][quote="[email protected]"]In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers
[/quote]

In A, B and C, [i]an automobile manufacturer...agreed to pay...for CARS[/i] does not convey the intended meaning. The manufacturer agreed to pay not for the CARS themselves but for what it DID to the cars: it TEST-DROVE the cars [i]WITH THEIR ODOMETERS DISCONNECTED[/i]. The wording in A, B and C could imply that the manufacturer was PURCHASING the cars -- quite the opposite of the intended meaning. Eliminate A, B and C.

In E, the combination [i]agreed...were test-driven[/i] (both past tense) implies that the two actions took place at the same time. To convey the proper sequence of events, the latter verb should be in the past perfect tense: the manufacturer [i]agreed to pay...for having cars that HAD BEEN test-driven[/i].

The correct answer is [spoiler]D[/spoiler].

Only [spoiler]D[/spoiler] conveys the intended meaning, that the manufacturer agreed to pay for what it DID to the cars: [i]an automobile manufacturer...agreed to pay...for HAVING TEST-DRIVEN cars WITH THEIR ODOMETERS DISCONNECTED[/i].

In D, [i]having test-driven[/i] is a GERUND -- a verb functioning as a noun. For WHAT did the manufacturer pay? For HAVING TEST-DRIVEN the cars. [b]HAVING + past participle[/b] implies PRIOR ACTION. Thus, D conveys the proper sequence of events: the manufacturer [i]agreed to pay[/i] (in the past) for its PRIOR ACTION ([i]having test-driven[/i] the cars, even further in the past).[/quote]

Thanks Sir, very nice explanation

avik.ch wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote:
In D, having test-driven is a GERUND -- a verb functioning as a noun. For WHAT did the manufacturer pay? For HAVING TEST-DRIVEN the cars. HAVING + past participle implies PRIOR ACTION. Thus, D conveys the proper sequence of events: the manufacturer agreed to pay (in the past) for its PRIOR ACTION (having test-driven the cars, even further in the past).

Hi Mitch Sir,

I have a doubt here.

Gerund and participle(as an adjective) are a form of verbs that are in infinite form. The form of these remain same in whatever tense we write a sentence.

Jessica is a charming lady - "charming" is an adjective. Even if we write it in a past tense the form of the gerund "charming" is same.

Jessica was a charming lady.

My question is do the participle,when it are not a main verb, or a gerund signifies the time sequence of an action ? Because the change in time sequence will only change the main verb, or the first word of the main verb, and not the gerund or the participle(when it are not a main verb).

I got D from stylistic point by considering "having test-driven cars" as a subject noun, which is more concise than the rest. I didnt knew that gerund do also signifies time sequence.

Please help. Am I going wrong anywhere.

Even when a verb serves as an adjective (participle) or as a noun (gerund), it still implies a sequence of events.

VERBing implies CONTEMPORANEOUS ACTION: an action happening at the same time as another event in the sentence.
EATING his dessert, John SAT at the table.
Here, EATING (adjective) implies CONTEMPORANEOUS action -- an action occurring as John SAT.

John DISCOVERED an upside to RUNNING the course for the first time.
Here, RUNNING (gerund) implies CONTEMPORANEOUS action -- an action occurring as John DISCOVERED.

HAVING + past participle implies PRIOR ACTION: an action completed before another event in the sentence.
HAVING FINISHED his dessert, John LEFT the table.
Here, HAVING FINISHED (adjective) implies PRIOR ACTION -- an action completed before John LEFT the table.

John DISCOVERED an upside to HAVING RUN the course previously.
Here, HAVING RUN (gerund) implies PRIOR ACTION -- an action completed before John DISCOVERED.

(D)

Having test Driven cars is more Concise and Clear

GMATGuruNY wrote:
Even when a verb serves as an adjective (participle) or as a noun (gerund), it still implies a sequence of events.

VERBing implies CONTEMPORANEOUS ACTION: an action happening at the same time as another event in the sentence.
EATING his dessert, John SAT at the table.
Here, EATING (adjective) implies CONTEMPORANEOUS action -- an action occurring as John SAT.

John DISCOVERED an upside to RUNNING the course for the first time.
Here, RUNNING (gerund) implies CONTEMPORANEOUS action -- an action occurring as John DISCOVERED.

HAVING + past participle implies PRIOR ACTION: an action completed before another event in the sentence.
HAVING FINISHED his dessert, John LEFT the table.
Here, HAVING FINISHED (adjective) implies PRIOR ACTION -- an action completed before John LEFT the table.

John DISCOVERED an upside to HAVING RUN the course previously.
Here, HAVING RUN (gerund) implies PRIOR ACTION -- an action completed before John DISCOVERED.

Hi Mitch sir,

Thanks for your awesome explanation.