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
First women to draw soldier's pension.
- rahulg83
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 575
- Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 18 times
- Followed by:4 members
- GMAT Score:710
Boils down to A and D, A is correct because it is using correct verb tense..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
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..
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
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
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
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
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
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
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 ?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
Please tell what I am missing here.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
Experts kindly help me understand this...goelmohit2002 wrote: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 ?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
Please tell what I am missing here.
Isn't use of "had" makes that action precede all the other actions mentioned in the sentence.....
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 ..
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 ..
- rahulg83
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 575
- Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 18 times
- Followed by:4 members
- GMAT Score:710
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..
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..
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
Thanks Rahul.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..
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.
- dumb.doofus
- 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
Probably a simple sentence may clear your doubt..goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks Rahul.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..
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.
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/
https://dreambigdreamhigh.blocked/
https://gmattoughies.blocked/
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
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.
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.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:2 members
Experts kindly share your opinion about this!!!!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.
- dumb.doofus
- 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
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.goelmohit2002 wrote:Experts kindly share your opinion about this!!!!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.
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/
https://dreambigdreamhigh.blocked/
https://gmattoughies.blocked/
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1578
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
- Thanked: 82 times
- Followed by:9 members
- GMAT Score:720
dumb.doofus wrote:goelmohit2002 wrote: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,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 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