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

Redeem

First women to draw soldier's pension.

Expert replies

by goelmohit2002 » Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:35 am
maihuna wrote: 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....
Thanks Maihuna for nice explanation for kicking out D....
Join the discussion

by Stacey Koprince » Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:47 am
Someone asked me in another thread to address the past perfect issue here.

We've got a list of three things:
joined
was injured
was discharged

Those three are properly parallel.

WITHIN one of those things, we have a sequence of two events:
was discharged because she had become too ill to serve.

WITHIN that item, we have two events. The first one gets past perfect. The second gets simple past.

We aren't necessarily trying to relate every verb in the sentence to every other verb. In this case, we're only trying to relate the "had become too ill to serve" info to the "was discharged" info.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Join the discussion

by goelmohit2002 » Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:59 am
Thanks Stacey.
Join the discussion

by tanviet » Sat Aug 01, 2009 3:16 am
I think that we do not need past perfect here

we use simple past because "and" can create the following of the last action."and" can say that the last action happen after the previous action

if we use past perfect, it is ambiguous that the last action happen before all 3 actions.
Join the discussion

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Aug 01, 2009 6:48 am
duongthang wrote:I think that we do not need past perfect here

we use simple past because "and" can create the following of the last action."and" can say that the last action happen after the previous action

if we use past perfect, it is ambiguous that the last action happen before all 3 actions.
Please refer to the post of Stacey and Rahul abt this doubt on this thread only.....

I too had the same doubt....which Stacey and Rahul explained very well.
Join the discussion

by bonbossamazing » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:54 am
This question is testing Verb parallelism.

The Correct verb forms in this questions are -
Joined
Was injured
Was discharged

injured - Participial - Verb-ed modifier not a bonafide verb
discharged - Participial - Verb-ed Modifier not a bonafide verb

Only Option A has all forms of verb in parallel.
Join the discussion

by sagarock » Fri Aug 05, 2016 9:30 am
Mitch sir,why is simple past not justified here and what is the reason to use past perfect here? Is this a unique rule?
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:28 am
sagarock wrote:what is the reason to use past perfect here?
The past perfect serves to express a past action completed before another past event.
Deborah Sampson was discharged because she had become too ill to serve.
Here, the past action in red (she had become too ill to serve) was completed before the past action in blue (Deborah Sampson was discharged).
For this reason, the action in red is expressed in the past perfect tense.
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
Join the discussion