This seems to be a good counter example, I have the same doubt. Can someone explain please?

hooray wrote:I don't understand this either.

MGMAT says the following is correct in its SC Guide:

The teacher THOUGHT that Jimmy HAD CHEATED on the exam.

Isn't this the same idea?

... studies LED him to propose that ... HAD MELTED

Please explain!

bedazzled wrote:IMO B because when we talk about the action began in the past and continues into the present we use past perfect or if action preceeds the earlier past action otherwise simple past.

Hence 'had existed' replaced by 'existed'

i guess u are getting this concept wrong

refer this thread : I had created this one with the help of ron..


https://www.beatthegmat.com/present-perf ... 49438.html

enjoy !

mmslf75 wrote:

bedazzled wrote:IMO B because when we talk about the action began in the past and continues into the present we use past perfect or if action preceeds the earlier past action otherwise simple past.

Hence 'had existed' replaced by 'existed'

i guess u are getting this concept wrong

refer this thread : I had created this one with the help of ron..


https://www.beatthegmat.com/present-perf ... 49438.html

enjoy !

As per MAnhattan SC,
Incorrect: I think that ancient peoples HAD BELIEVED in many gods.
Correct: I think that ancient peoples BELIEVED in many gods.

Here both are correct but had is unnnecessary. When 'believed' only can do work.

Same case is here Louiz proposed one theory back in 1837 about an age that once existed but now that are temperate area.

Correct me if am wrong.

His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age in which great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas

(A) in which great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas
(B) in which great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas
(C) when great ice sheets existed where there were areas now temperate
(D) when great ice sheets had existed in current temperate areas
(E) when great ice sheets existed in areas now that are temperate

between b) and a) which one is correct??

My answer would be A.
C,D,&E are easily eliminated...
So what is wrong with B? To my knowledge, B is correct if you remove "in what are now temperate areas" from the sentence.
One must use Past perfect to clarify that "great ice sheets had existed" in the past wheras now those areas are temperate.
[/quote]

If I change your examples tiny bit..which one will be correct?

I always thought that ancient peoples HAD BELIEVED in many gods.
I always thought that ancient peoples BELIEVED in many gods.

bedazzled wrote:

mmslf75 wrote:

bedazzled wrote:IMO B because when we talk about the action began in the past and continues into the present we use past perfect or if action preceeds the earlier past action otherwise simple past.

Hence 'had existed' replaced by 'existed'

i guess u are getting this concept wrong

refer this thread : I had created this one with the help of ron..


https://www.beatthegmat.com/present-perf ... 49438.html

enjoy !

As per MAnhattan SC,
Incorrect: I think that ancient peoples HAD BELIEVED in many gods.
Correct: I think that ancient peoples BELIEVED in many gods.

Here both are correct but had is unnnecessary. When 'believed' only can do work.

Same case is here Louiz proposed one theory back in 1837 about an age that once existed but now that are temperate area.

Correct me if am wrong.

In this case I guess A is correct because here person 'always' thought but this thinking got changed due to any reason.

I want to know whether I am right or wrong.

I think the same. "thought" so we have to use "had" to specify an action that happened before "thought"

We need an expert here..

bedazzled wrote:In this case I guess A is correct because here person 'always' thought but this thinking got changed
due to any reason.

I want to know whether I am right or wrong.

yeah I think we need an expert

& there's one more problem how to distinguish between "TRANSITIVE & INTRANSITIVE VERBS"

https://www.beatthegmat.com/verbs-t50943.html#216207

help on this matter too

First of all I wonder if "exist" is in parallel with the other verbs of the sentence, viz., led (studies) and propose (LA).
simply put the sentence looks like the below
"studies led LA to propose the concept"

Now how does a modifier or whatever which informs us further about the concept come in to the purview of the two verbs led and propose?

and if it does not come in to the purview of other verbs then how can we attribute the rules of past perfect to this modifier?
So I sincerely feel it is B

and about the other examples,

first,

Incorrect: I think that ancient peoples HAD BELIEVED in many gods.
Correct: I think that ancient peoples BELIEVED in many gods.

in this example think is in present so we are talking about actions in the present and past, so I think BELIEVED is better than HAD BELIEVED

second,
I always thought that ancient peoples HAD BELIEVED in many gods.
I always thought that ancient peoples BELIEVED in many gods.

thought here is in past so coming to this we are using two tenses in the past in which the belief happened first, so usage of had is appropriate.

Please correct me if i am wrong.

I think we really need an expert here. Please reply. We need to know where we are wrong. We are just creating a pile of thoughts. Nobody is sure.
: : :

I have sent a PM to Stuart. Waiting for his response.

It seems Stuart is busy.

Be patient people! This thread is 18 months old, after all!

His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age in which great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas.

Here's the key verb tense rule for the GMAT: the tenses we choose must accurately reflect the order of actions. If two actions take place simultaneously, use the same tense; if two actions take place at different times, use different tenses.

We use the past perfect (or the "double past") when we have two discrete events in the past; the older of the two events takes the past perfect.

In this particular sentence, we have to be very careful. "led" is a discrete event in the past, so an earlier related event would take the past perfect. However, "existed" isn't related to "led"; it's actually related to the "are now" at the end of the sentence. Since "are now" is the present, we use the simple past "existed" to show the relationship between those two actions.

This choice becomes clearer if we ignore the first part of the sentence:

Great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas.

is clearly wrong; instead, we would say:

Great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas.

Accordingly, (B) is the correct choice.

Thanks for inviting me to join the discussion, guys!

The answer here is B, and the rationale for it is that:

1) With the past-perfect tense "had", you'd use it to separate one event in the past further back from another, such as:

As I shook (past tense) his hand, I realized (same time as "shook", so also past tense) that I had seen (this happened before "shook" and "realized", so we'd use "had" to set it back further in time) him on television before.

2) If only one event occurs in the past tense, you'll just use the simple past tense:

I shook his hand.

3) Important to this question, that last phrase "great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas" is an independent clause, and the clause only contains one verb ("existed"). The authors of this question are crafty - they use the past-tense verb "led" in that phrase "led LA to propose the concept...", but LA's action is independent to that of the great ice sheets. Because that last phrase is independent, and only contains one verb, the simple past tense "existed" is required.

Stuart and veritas-brian - Great explanations