Sentence Correction

Hey, guys! here is an official explanation.

The original sentence expresses the main verb “attended” in the past tense and the two subordinate actions in the "-ing" form. This construction correctly indicates that “receiving” and developing” followed as a consequence of Einstein’s attendance of “the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich.”

(A) CORRECT. This answer choice is correct as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) This answer choice breaks the correct parallelism of "receiving" and "developing" present in the original sentence.

(C) This answer choice expresses all the verbs in the underlined portion in the same form: “attended,” “received,” and “developed.” This change alters the original meaning of the sentence by making these actions independent and sequential rather than demonstrating that “receiving” and “developing” occurred as a consequence of the fact that “Albert Einstein attended the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich.” Further, this answer choice introduces the redundant pronoun “he,” which unnecessarily repeats the subject of the sentence and breaks parallelism.

(D) This answer choice makes "attended" and "received" parallel, leaving "developing" as a subordinate action. This change alters the meaning of the sentence, as described above in the explanation for choice (C). Moreover, there is no "and" between "attended" and "received," as there should always be between the items in a two-item list.

(E) This answer choice creates an incomplete sentence that lacks the main verb and consists merely of a series of "-ing" forms: “attending,” “receiving,” and “developing.”

Before going ahead with options, I would like to remind us one rule.

Rule: “,<verb> + ing” qualifies as an adjective to the entire clause before comma.


We can interpret the sentence in two ways:
1.After moving to Switzerland in the 1980’s Albert Einstein attended the SFPS in Zurich. In the school, he received in-depth training in quantitative analysis and developed a foundation for his future work in mathematical physics.
2.After moving to Switzerland in the 1980’s Albert Einstein attended the SFPS in Zurich, received in-depth training in quantitative analysis and developed a foundation for his future work in mathematical physics.

What’s the difference between two interpretations above?
1.Shows that Einstein received the in-depth training and developed a foundation while attending the school i.e. these two actions happened while he was attending the school.
2.Shows that Einstein attended the school, received the in-depth training and developed a foundation after moving to Switzerland, but doesn’t talk anything about the order of the actions. He might received the in-depth training first, then developed a foundation, and then attended the school.

Now let’s see options one by one.

a. attended the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich, receiving in-depth training in quantitative analysis and developing

receiving and developing is qualifying the clause before comma i.e. he received training and developed a foundation in the school. Doesn’t have any error.

b. attended the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich, receiving in-depth training in quantitative analysis and developed

receiving and developed are not parallel, so this is not same as the first one. We can correct this sentence by placing a comma before “and developed.” That would mean that Einstein attended school and developed foundation after moving to Switzerland. While he received the training attending the school.

c. attended the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich, received in-depth training in quantitative analysis, and he developed

“he” is the only problem with this option. If we remove ‘he’ then the option will be same as our Interpretation#2 above. We can argue that “and” is acting as a coordinating conjunction, joining two independent clauses:
1.Albert Einstein attended …
2.He developed …

But then “received in-depth training in quantitative analysis” seems to be misplaced.

d. attended the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich, received in-depth training in quantitative analysis, developing

Clearly has parallelism problem: attended, received and developing.

e. attending the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich, receiving in-depth training in quantitative analysis, and developing

This sentence looks like an incomplete sentence. Check this out:

Einstein attending, receiving, and developing.

What? Does above makes any sense? Clearly it’s an incomplete sentence.


Does all above long crap make any sense?

Feruza Matyakubova wrote:Hey, guys! here is an official explanation.
...

I didn't see this post before replying :roll:, but looks like the explanation is same as what I said.

Karmayogi, thanks for taking your time and explaining.

karmayogi wrote:Before going ahead with options, I would like to remind us one rule.

Rule: “,<verb> + ing” qualifies as an adjective to the entire clause before comma.

Where can we read about the rule mentioned above?

Thanks

Feruza Matyakubova wrote:Karmayogi, thanks for taking your time and explaining.

karmayogi wrote:Before going ahead with options, I would like to remind us one rule.

Rule: “,<verb> + ing” qualifies as an adjective to the entire clause before comma.

Where can we read about the rule mentioned above?

Thanks

I don't remember where I read this rule, but it is used very often in GMAT world.

Feruza Matyakubova wrote:Karmayogi, thanks for taking your time and explaining.

karmayogi wrote:Before going ahead with options, I would like to remind us one rule.

Rule: “,<verb> + ing” qualifies as an adjective to the entire clause before comma.

Where can we read about the rule mentioned above?

Thanks

Feruza: Page 112 of MGMAT SC addresses this rule. Unfortunately, this is one of several grammar topics (potential GMAT SC killers) that the MGMAT SC doesn't thoroughly address, though.

Karma: Well done!

C is wrong because "he" is not needed.

E is not a sentence

in A, receiving and developing happen simultaneously with attend and is not wrong

in B, attend is parallel with develop. I think this meaning is not so logic as meaning in A.

A is correct