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

Redeem

First women to draw soldier's pension.

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:05 am
Thanked: 9 times
GMAT Score:680

First women to draw soldier's pension.

by hemanth28 » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:13 pm
Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve.

* 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become
* 22, was injured three times, while being discharged in 1783 because she had become
* 22, and was injured three times, and discharged in 1783, being
* 22, injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she was
* 22, having been injured three times and discharged in 1783, being

Can someone please explain in detail??

OA is A
Last edited by hemanth28 on Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
GMAT First take :- 680
Getting the guns ready for second shot !!!
https://beatenbygmat.blocked
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
Location: India
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:710

Re: First women to draw sodiar's pension.

by rahulg83 » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:29 pm
hemanth28 wrote:Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve.

* 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become
* 22, was injured three times, while being discharged in 1783 because she had become
* 22, and was injured three times, and discharged in 1783, being
* 22, injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she was
* 22, having been injured three times and discharged in 1783, being

Can someone please explain in detail??

OA is A
Boils down to A and D, A is correct because it is using correct verb tense..
she had become severely ill and then she was discharged...
In D, we have the above two events in the simple past, happening at the same time..
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Jun 27, 2009 12:12 am
Can you please help me understand how option A uses the correct tenses...

As per my understanding....past perfect precedes any of the simple past event.....in a sentence...

there are following past events...

1. joined.
2. injured.
3. discharged.
4. had become.

Thus to me it looks like she became ill before any of these simple past events....

Please help me understand what i am missing here.

Thanks
Mohit
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:51 am
Thanked: 1 times

by rseeker2 » Sat Jun 27, 2009 2:32 am
She got injured three times -- this is one thing

She became too ill, got discharged -- these two need to come one after another, so the first action, i.e. falling ill -- gets the past perfect, while the latter (getting discharged) gets the simple past
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:14 am
rseeker2 wrote:She got injured three times -- this is one thing

She became too ill, got discharged -- these two need to come one after another, so the first action, i.e. falling ill -- gets the past perfect, while the latter (getting discharged) gets the simple past
But what about the rest of the actions..."joined" and "injured" ? Doesn't the sentence structure tell that "had become ill" preceded both of them too ?

Please tell what I am missing here.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 3:55 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:740

by Domnu » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:57 pm
If "injured" is used instead of "was injured," it would appear that she injured somebody else.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:45 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:
rseeker2 wrote:She got injured three times -- this is one thing

She became too ill, got discharged -- these two need to come one after another, so the first action, i.e. falling ill -- gets the past perfect, while the latter (getting discharged) gets the simple past
But what about the rest of the actions..."joined" and "injured" ? Doesn't the sentence structure tell that "had become ill" preceded both of them too ?

Please tell what I am missing here.
Experts kindly help me understand this...

Isn't use of "had" makes that action precede all the other actions mentioned in the sentence.....
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:14 am
Thanked: 13 times

by ketkoag » Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:28 am
goelmohit2002, i think "had" here is only for "discharged in 1783 " "had" here is used in a cause effect relationship and clearly indicates that it a reason why she was discharged in 1783..

Now my query here is that why D is wrong.. it can be possible that she was ill and discharged at the same time... the reason i am asking this question is that in A it might be possible that she had become ill but at the time of discharge she could be healthy.. i mean both A and D states the cause effect relationship but in D it clearly states that at the time of discharge she was ill.. but in A as i mentioned above she could be ill before the discharge but at that time she could be healthy and I think that this doesn't confirm the reason she was discharged..
please lemme know if i missed something or my interpretation is not convincing you..
hemanth28, Please let us know the source of this problem.. kinda confusing problem to me, atleast :) ..
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
Location: India
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:710

by rahulg83 » Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:33 am
Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve.

I think here we have three main clauses, which are parallel

1st -> Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22,

2nd -> [SHE]was injured three times,

3rd- > [SHE]was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve

now for emphasizing which action happened first in the 3rd clause..we need had instead of was..
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:28 am
rahulg83 wrote:Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve.

I think here we have three main clauses, which are parallel

1st -> Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22,

2nd -> [SHE]was injured three times,

3rd- > [SHE]was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve

now for emphasizing which action happened first in the 3rd clause..we need had instead of was..
Thanks Rahul.

Does it mean that...

had rule applies to independent clauses.....and not on the sentence as a whole...

I hope I am clear in my doubt. If not then please tell....i will elaborate further.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:02 pm
Location: San Jose, CA
Thanked: 43 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

by dumb.doofus » Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:40 pm
goelmohit2002 wrote:
rahulg83 wrote:Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve.

I think here we have three main clauses, which are parallel

1st -> Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier’s pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22,

2nd -> [SHE]was injured three times,

3rd- > [SHE]was discharged in 1783 because she had become too ill to serve

now for emphasizing which action happened first in the 3rd clause..we need had instead of was..
Thanks Rahul.

Does it mean that...

had rule applies to independent clauses.....and not on the sentence as a whole...

I hope I am clear in my doubt. If not then please tell....i will elaborate further.
Probably a simple sentence may clear your doubt..

I played cricket on Monday, swam the whole day on Tuesday and thus suffered from cold on Wednesday because I had not covered my head while swimming on Tuesday.

hope this clarifies.. I have tried to give you three different time periods.. and use of had correctly shows that I didnt cover my head on tuesday or before the time I got cold... it surely doesnt apply to the whole sentence.. as I did play cricket on Monday and was totally alright that day..
One love, one blood, one life. You got to do what you should.
https://dreambigdreamhigh.blocked/
https://gmattoughies.blocked/
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:20 am
Thanks DD.

Can you please tell how to figure out "had" action precede which all actions in the sentence?

Basically does it mean that if there are two independent clauses X and Y joined together in a sentence, then if "had" is present in X, then does it precede all the actions in clause X and has no connection with the actions of clause Y.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:11 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks DD.

Can you please tell how to figure out "had" action precede which all actions in the sentence?

Basically does it mean that if there are two independent clauses X and Y joined together in a sentence, then if "had" is present in X, then does it precede all the actions in clause X and has no connection with the actions of clause Y.
Experts kindly share your opinion about this!!!!
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:02 pm
Location: San Jose, CA
Thanked: 43 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

by dumb.doofus » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:46 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks DD.

Can you please tell how to figure out "had" action precede which all actions in the sentence?

Basically does it mean that if there are two independent clauses X and Y joined together in a sentence, then if "had" is present in X, then does it precede all the actions in clause X and has no connection with the actions of clause Y.
Experts kindly share your opinion about this!!!!
There's no hard and fast rule buddy.. it's all relative to what you want to show in the sentence with respect to time. Use had when you want to show that one event occurred earlier than the other.

Hope this is helpful: https://gmattoughies.blocked/2009/0 ... rfect.html
One love, one blood, one life. You got to do what you should.
https://dreambigdreamhigh.blocked/
https://gmattoughies.blocked/
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:23 am
dumb.doofus wrote:
goelmohit2002 wrote:
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks DD.


There's no hard and fast rule buddy.. it's all relative to what you want to show in the sentence with respect to time. Use had when you want to show that one event occurred earlier than the other.

Hope this is helpful: https://gmattoughies.blocked/2009/0 ... rfect.html
I think rule of had is to differentiate between two events not three, because it is used only to order which happen first, and after first came second, if their is third, I am not aware about any linguistic construct ordering three events,

I ate breakfast and had brushed the teeth and *** gone for shit, yes thats a possibility but grammatical constructs are not their to help for shit, it may happen may not happen, let it be the way it is...

BTW, D is having some other issues as well... parallelism, joined, injured, and was discharged, here injured is not parallel to joined, because injured needs an agent/infinitive to work with it, have you ever heard injured in isolation? was injured is ok....
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Post new topic Locked