pakistani women

IMO ... C
In all other cases 'it' doesn't have correct antecedent.

IMO D..

In D it has a clear referent --> status of pakistani women....

now this is wat the problem is ...C and D both seem right to me...so shall we select C for brevity ??

You have posted Wrong Question i think, Its very hard to find mistake in C and D, I just googled it and found the correct one.

1. Despite the recent election of a woman to the office of prime minister, the status of women in Pakistan is little changed from how it was in the last century.
(A) is little changed from how it was
(B) is a little change from how it was
(C) has changed little
(D) has changed little from how it has been
(E) is little changed from the way it was

i have made a slight change in choice D.....in original choices i could easily strike off wrong choices...but then i thought if D looked something diff then wat i would do....


i guess both C and D are right and GMAT would not test us on this....

"from how" and "from the way" is not logic

"from what it was" is wordy

C is left

2010gmat wrote:In D it has a clear referent --> status of pakistani women....

now this is wat the problem is ...C and D both seem right to me...so shall we select C for brevity ??

Folks,

In SC, there is a ladder or hierarchy of three criteria for the accredited response. This means, correspondingly, that you (the test-taker) has three tasks in the following order:

1) Grammatical correctness
2) Preserve the speaker's intended meaning
3) Style

Sometimes, you WILL have two choices, both of which are grammatically correct. You then have to ask: does either of them change the speaker's intended meaning?

Whatever the grammatical differences between C and D, there is a distinction between them having to do with the speaker's intended meaning.

The speaker of the original sentence says the status of Pakistani women has changed little from how it was in the last century. So, the speaker is comparing the status of Pakistani women in this century to what it was in the last century. Instead, choice C says the status of women has changed little in this century. The sense of comparison to last century is lost.

If someone were to say the sentence with choice C in the underlining, the listener would not necessarily think at all about the last century. Choice C fails to preserve the speaker's intended meaning.

Therefore, whatever its grammatical status, it CANNOT be correct.

Make sure you use critical reasoning skills in sentence correction. In particular, think about the speaker's main point or conclusion precisely. And use the ladder.

awesome point...

but OA is C...

has changed little in last century.... {doesn't it mean that it is almost same as what it was earlier...so sense of comparison is still there...}

2010gmat wrote:awesome point...

but OA is C...

has changed little in last century.... {doesn't it mean that it is almost same as what it was earlier...so sense of comparison is still there...}

I think C changes the meaning slightly.
What's the source?

Manhattan GMAT or 1000 sc .... will check and let you know

Testluv wrote:

2010gmat wrote:awesome point...

but OA is C...

has changed little in last century.... {doesn't it mean that it is almost same as what it was earlier...so sense of comparison is still there...}

I think C changes the meaning slightly.
What's the source?

Hi,

Is it wrong to say that "In the last 100 years (used as century in the original sentence), the status of pakistani women has changed a little"??

I feel the word century is used not just for comparing the status of women in the previous cnetury. But, it might also be a case that "In the last century (100 years), the status of pakistani women has changed a little" is true..

Please explain!

raghavakumar85 wrote:

Testluv wrote:

2010gmat wrote:awesome point...

but OA is C...

has changed little in last century.... {doesn't it mean that it is almost same as what it was earlier...so sense of comparison is still there...}

I think C changes the meaning slightly.
What's the source?

Hi,

Is it wrong to say that "In the last 100 years (used as century in the original sentence), the status of pakistani women has changed a little"??

I feel the word century is used not just for comparing the status of women in the previous cnetury. But, it might also be a case that "In the last century (100 years), the status of pakistani women has changed a little" is true..

Please explain!

The issue isn't what is true or what it is fine to say. The issue is which choice fullly and faithfully represents and preserves the intent behind the original speaker's words--which choice preserves the intended meaning. On the GMAT, a choice that fails to preserve the intended meaning of the speaker can safely be nized--even if it is grammatically correct.

Testluv wrote:

raghavakumar85 wrote:

Testluv wrote:

2010gmat wrote:awesome point...

but OA is C...

has changed little in last century.... {doesn't it mean that it is almost same as what it was earlier...so sense of comparison is still there...}

I think C changes the meaning slightly.
What's the source?

Hi,

Is it wrong to say that "In the last 100 years (used as century in the original sentence), the status of pakistani women has changed a little"??

I feel the word century is used not just for comparing the status of women in the previous cnetury. But, it might also be a case that "In the last century (100 years), the status of pakistani women has changed a little" is true..

Please explain!

The issue isn't what is true or what it is fine to say. The issue is which choice fullly and faithfully represents and preserves the intent behind the original speaker's words--which choice preserves the intended meaning. On the GMAT, a choice that fails to preserve the intended meaning of the speaker can safely be nized--even if it is grammatically correct.

I agree with what you said. My question is about the speaker's intent. 100 years (in the last century - may be from 1900-1999, ) is different from 100+ years (comparing today's status to that it was in the last century) may be from 1900 to the date when the speaker was saying this (2009 or 2050).

I don't know if i'm interpreting it right or not. But my question is not about the correctness of the sentence, but is about the author's intent about the time. Please excuse if this is not a valid thing to point out.

I pick C. I think "has changed little from what it was" is redundant. If something has changed, of course it would've changed "from what it was", so the second part in unnecessary.