aditya8062 wrote:Good Day Guru
Guru this sentence is not from any SC ;i am really sorry but i came across this sentence while doing the following problem:
Scientists have found signs that moving water changed the chemical makeup of the surface of Mars in recent eras, therefore concluding that its crust is harboring up to three times as much water than was previously thought.
(A) eras, therefore concluding that its crust is harboring up to three times as much water than was
(B) eras, therefore concluding that the planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water or more as was
(C) eras and have therefore concluded that the planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as
(D) eras and they have concluded, therefore, that its crust harbors up to three times as much water, or more, than
(E) eras and concluded, therefore, that the planet's crust is harboring up to three times more water as was
please note that in this problem i eliminated A and B because "therefore concluding" is modifying "moving water changed the chemical makeup of the surface of Mars in recent eras" -----> which is wrong .Kindly tell me whether same logic can be extended to SENTENCE 1?
thanks and best regards
This line of reasoning is sound.
In both your sentence and the official sentence, the agent of COMMA +
concluding should be the implied subject of the preceding
that-clause.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at
[email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
