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

Redeem

gmat set 14

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:23 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

gmat set 14

by clammiestqasar » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:03 am
Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.

A. sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of
B. sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has been dated at 34 million years old, thus making it the earliest mammal known on
C. sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of
D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on
E. sloth which, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the earliest known mammal of

OA is C but I thought it was D.
Please Help.
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Legendary Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:44 am
Thanked: 70 times
Followed by:6 members

by niksworth » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:33 am
D is incorrect because use of perfect form is not required in this context. Removing the unnecessary information from the statement, this converts to - Fossils of the arm of a sloth have been dated at 34 million years old. Present perfect form denotes an action just completed. There is no indication to support this assumption. Use of simple past would do.

However, I wonder if C is perfectly right. Removing the modifiers, C says - Fossils of the arm of a sloth was dated at 34 million years old.

Now, was can only be right if the subject of the sentence is sloth. However, it can be said that fossils must be regarded as the subject. In that case, the verb should be were. In fact if the subject is fossils, it requires changes in the modifier as well (that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991).

In my opinion A is the best of the five answer choices.

Can someone shed some light on this?
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:23 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

by clammiestqasar » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:46 am
yES. yOU are correct C cannot be the right option.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:27 am
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:2 members

by ashish2104 » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:27 am
Even I have same doubt.

C says: sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of

I think the bolded was should be 'were' to match plural fossils
The preious 'was' usage is correct as the subject of relative clause introduced is sloth(singular)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:44 am
Thanked: 70 times
Followed by:6 members

by niksworth » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:40 am
ashish2104 wrote:Even I have same doubt.

C says: sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of

I think the bolded was should be 'were' to match plural fossils
The preious 'was' usage is correct as the subject of relative clause introduced is sloth(singular)
Ashish,
If the subject of the relative clause is sloth, then it effectively means that the sloth was found in 1991 and not fossils. (Fossils of the arm of a sloth, that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991..) That wouldn't make much sense, would it?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:27 am
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:2 members

by ashish2104 » Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:53 pm
niksworth wrote:
ashish2104 wrote:Even I have same doubt.

C says: sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of

I think the bolded was should be 'were' to match plural fossils
The preious 'was' usage is correct as the subject of relative clause introduced is sloth(singular)
Ashish,
If the subject of the relative clause is sloth, then it effectively means that the sloth was found in 1991 and not fossils. (Fossils of the arm of a sloth, that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991..) That wouldn't make much sense, would it?
Niksworth,

In A too, usage of 'it' would be incorrect if we need to refer to fossils.

Besides in C, relative clause is :that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991
that refers to nouns previous noun which is sloth(singular). If we had that was instead of only comma+was, then C would be proper

In my opinion all choices areincorrect in some way....it seems somethings is missing in the answer choices.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:05 am
Thanked: 7 times

by BastiG » Sat Aug 28, 2010 8:48 pm
I wouldn't really bother with such questions. Clearly all answers are wrong..
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:19 am
clammiestqasar wrote:Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.

A. sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of
B. sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has been dated at 34 million years old, thus making it the earliest mammal known on
C. sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of
D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on
E. sloth which, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the earliest known mammal of

OA is C but I thought it was D.
Please Help.
you cant choose D because sloth is not a plural noun.
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:06 am
Thanked: 14 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:770

by prepgmat09 » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:36 am
OA is D, not C. You can check Ron's explanation at the following link:

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/sc- ... t7830.html
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:23 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

by clammiestqasar » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:37 am
E is clearly wrong because of the position of the comma.
D could be right because the present perfect says that it was dated at 34 million years ago and it still holds true.
C is wrong because of the was/were issue and for the fact that sloth is the antecedent of that instead of fossils.It changes the meaning of the sentence.
B is wrong because of the unnecessary they.
A- If we rewrite the original sentence again with a lil modification-
Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991,and was dated at 34 million years old,made the sloth the earliest known mammal of the great antilles islands.
It clearly represents the sloth and not the fossils because fossils cannot be the earliest known mammal.
I think A can be the correct answer
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:06 am
Thanked: 14 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:770

by prepgmat09 » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:47 am
A is wrong. "Fossils" do not make sloth the earliest known mammal. It is the "finding of the fossils" that makes the sloth the earliest known mammal. This meaning is not clear in A but in D. D is the correct answer.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1