BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Under new corporate insurance policy---pronoun usage

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:02 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

Under new corporate insurance policy---pronoun usage

by champmag » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:52 pm
Under the new corporate insurance policy, when an employer is charged for damages to a third party wholly or largely as a result of actions by an employee, he is entitled to recoup the amount of the damages.
(A) he is entitled to recoup
(B) the employer is entitled to recoup
(C) he or she is entitled to recoup
(D) he is entitled to recoup for
(E) the employer is entitled to recoup for

I would like to discuss the usage of pronouns in this question. why is option C not a valid construction?
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:35 pm
Whats the source ?
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:43 pm
IMO B.. in 53 seconds.

btw B and E... E i felt is redundant regarding "recoup for"

He or she is wrong here... there are three persons here, employee, employer and thrid person.

He or she is creating ambiguity by referign to anyone of the three.
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:59 pm
HSPA wrote:IMO B.. in 53 seconds.

btw B and E... E i felt is redundant regarding "recoup for"

He or she is wrong here... there are three persons here, employee, employer and thrid person.

He or she is creating ambiguity by referign to anyone of the three.
There is a rule that says the subject of the 1st clause acts as the subject of the second clause when you check for Pronoun Ambiguity. Whats the source ?
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:08 pm
My approach was based on removing stuff in btw commas.. which gives

Under the new corporate insurance policy, he is entitled to recoup the amount of the damages.

So i thought the pronoun is not making sense..
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:19 pm
HSPA wrote:My approach was based on removing stuff in btw commas.. which gives

Under the new corporate insurance policy, he is entitled to recoup the amount of the damages.

So i thought the pronoun is not making sense..
Reasonable
Under the new corporate insurance policy, when an employer is charged for damages to a third party wholly or largely as a result of actions by an employee, he is entitled to recoup the amount of the damages.
But isnt the portion between the commas only removed when the portion is a modifier.
Here the portion Under the new corporate insurance policy is a modifier rather than "When ... "
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:49 pm
I was expecting "Under the new corporate insurance policy,an employer when charged for damages to third party, [the employer( she or he)] shall recoup damages from the employee responsible for the dam"
the third party shall recoup damages from the employer

I am not aware of the subject in 1st clause = pronoun in second, but with out the word employer when i started this question "he" was creating ambiguity

Thanks you munda.. I added two tips to my dB
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:17 pm
Between B and E i am more inclined towards E . Lets see whats the OA , then discuss , probability that i am wrong is high but that wil gv a learning :) .
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:02 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by champmag » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:19 pm
Thanx HSPA...that was a very clear explaination of pronoun ambiguity
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:22 am
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

by gig92 » Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:58 am
champmag wrote:Under the new corporate insurance policy, when an employer is charged for damages to a third party wholly or largely as a result of actions by an employee, he is entitled to recoup the amount of the damages.
(A) he is entitled to recoup
(B) the employer is entitled to recoup
(C) he or she is entitled to recoup
(D) he is entitled to recoup for
(E) the employer is entitled to recoup for

I would like to discuss the usage of pronouns in this question. why is option C not a valid construction?
The sentence is saying, "because the employer is covered under coporate policy, therefore, when there is an indictment for any reason, it is the employer who is entitled to recoup/reimbursement under the policy". The option B correctly identifies the pronoun after a long prepositional phrase after the subject (an employer).
gig92
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

by atulmangal » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:25 am
Read all the post and the rule suggested by Mundasingh,

But still must say, HE is ambiguous and when there is an option available which clears the ambiguity then we go with that answer choice. Moreover, The rule (Suggested by Mundasingh)holds when there is no other logical antecedent is present in the previous clause. But we have other logically possible antecedents as indicated By HSPA

Example:-

Manish told his friend that he had been elected as president.

Sub:- is MANISH but Friend can also be the logically possible antecedent, hence the above sentence is AMBIGUOUS.

IMO B is correct

In this sentence HE is ambiguous.
Last edited by atulmangal on Wed Apr 06, 2011 5:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1574
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am
Thanked: 88 times
Followed by:13 members

by aspirant2011 » Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:30 am
I am really confused between B and E...........wats wrong with E????? Is "recouped for" wrong usage????
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:31 am
I got a PM asking me to comment on skipping the portion between the commas. Let me be clear that there is no rule saying that you can simply skip what is between the commas. The rule is that if you have a modifying phrase, often set off by commas but often not, that does not contribute to the main part of the sentence, subject - verb - direct object, etc. then you can "skip" it for now.

In this case, you are much better of skipping the first part "under the new corporate insurance policy" this is a pure modifier that does contain important information for the grammar of the sentence. We can begin with "When an employer..." and not lose the grammar. If you skip the middle portion you are losing the antecedent for "he."

Altulmangal has correctly given the explanation for the rest of the sentence.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 61 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:740

by force5 » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:11 pm
great post I would go with B ...

However Just a FYI

both recoup and recoup for can be used in English.

eg: I can recoup (a person) for expenses.

In an attempt to recoup his fortune.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:55 pm
Any reason why E is wrong ?? I more question , in this sentence "the amount" stands for money or the degree of damage ???
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
Post new topic Locked