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

Redeem

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:36 am

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse

by JGmathelp » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:03 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights and for changes in the
married women's property laws.

(A) arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights
(B) arguing in a treatise for equal political and legal
rights for women
(C) a treatise that advocates women's equal political
and legal rights
(D) a treatise advocating women's equal political
and legal rights
(E) a treatise that argued for equal political and
legal rights for women

OA: E

What is the difference between E and B

Don't you need a verb in the second clause to make answer E paralleled? I would assume that "that" is the beginning of the split.
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:13 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:700

by hemant_rajput » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:10 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

JGmathelp wrote:In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights and for changes in the
married women's property laws.

(A) arguing in a treatise for women to have equal
political and legal rights
(B) arguing in a treatise for equal political and legal
rights for women
(C) a treatise that advocates women's equal political
and legal rights
(D) a treatise advocating women's equal political
and legal rights
(E) a treatise that argued for equal political and
legal rights for women

OA: E

What is the difference between E and B

Don't you need a verb in the second clause to make answer E paralleled? I would assume that "that" is the beginning of the split.
It is the problem of modifier. In both A and B arguing modifying the Lucretia Mott. She not arguing in treatise, so eliminate both A and B. Eliminate D because of present continuous tense. Event is of past so it is need a verb in the past. Eliminate C for the same reason.

Hope it helps.

Cheers,
Hemant
I'm no expert, just trying to work on my skills. If I've made any mistakes please bear with me.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:51 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by Lifetron » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:14 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

What's the source of the question ?

In E,

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, a treatise that argued for equal political and
legal rights for women

'a treatise' seems to modify women !

Can anyone confirm ?
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:30 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

In E,

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, a treatise that argued for equal political and
legal rights for women

'a treatise' seems to modify women !

Can anyone confirm ?
Bose i guess u r missing a point . the concrete nouns after comma can refer to the noun but here its "discourse on women" that "a treatise" refers .as RON says always keep an eye on nouns with preposition construction and that is exactly what is happening here
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:36 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

hemant wrote :It is the problem of modifier. In both A and B arguing modifying the Lucretia Mott. She not arguing in treatise, so eliminate both A and B.
i guess ur not correct 100 percent .i agree that "arguing" modifies "Lucretia Mott" and this construction at times can be correct .for instance :"hemant propounded the theme,arguing blah blah ...." seems correct !
what gets wrong in B is that "Lucretia Mott" cannot argue "in a treatise" .
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:42 pm
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 91 times
Followed by:46 members

by EducationAisle » Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:05 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

JGmathelp wrote:What is the difference between E and B
In B, it is not clear that Discourse on Women is the Treatise.
JGmathelp wrote: Don't you need a verb in the second clause to make answer E paralleled? I would assume that "that" is the beginning of the split.
Am not very clear on which is the second clause that you are referring to. The subordinate clause that argued.... obviously does have a verb argued. Also, when you say E is not parallel, what (according to you) should it be parallel to? If you could elaborate, perhaps we can help.

By the way, E uses absolute phrase. OG has numerous other examples of absolute phrase and it looks like GMAT likes to test students on this. Let me know and I can dig many more examples if it helps.
Ashish
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:

a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana

b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:36 am

by JGmathelp » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:06 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Thanks for help. Everything is clear now.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:51 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by Lifetron » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:13 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

aditya8062 wrote:
In E,

In 1850, Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on
Women, a treatise that argued for equal political and
legal rights for women

'a treatise' seems to modify women !

Can anyone confirm ?
Bose i guess u r missing a point . the concrete nouns after comma can refer to the noun but here its "discourse on women" that "a treatise" refers .as RON says always keep an eye on nouns with preposition construction and that is exactly what is happening here
Thanx aditya8062. This is from OG 12. Jus found out ! Actually, OG had the whole 'Discourse on
Women' thing in Italics. That was very clear. I guess I was totally stupid with that last post. But thanx for replying, though.

My approach while working out in OG was this

Lucretia Mott published "Discourse on Women", which is a treatise. This treatise argued for X and for Y.

X - equal political and
legal rights for women

Y - changes in the
married women's property laws

So, A and B are out.
We need 'for' before X to have a parallel structure

Only E gives that. Hence, E !
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:29 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Thanx aditya8062. This is from OG 12. Jus found out ! Actually, OG had the whole 'Discourse on
Women' thing in Italics. That was very clear. I guess I was totally stupid with that last post. But thanx for replying, though.
i am glad it helped !!

So, A and B are out.
W
e need 'for' before X to have a parallel structure

Only E gives that. Hence, E
!

this "for" is very much in B and B is also parallel .plz read my previous post as why B is wrong !!
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:51 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by Lifetron » Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:51 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

what gets wrong in B is that "Lucretia Mott" cannot argue "in a treatise"
Could you just explain this aditya ? I don't think I get it fully !
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:14 members

by aditya8062 » Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:14 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

gughanbose wrote:
what gets wrong in B is that "Lucretia Mott" cannot argue "in a treatise"
Could you just explain this aditya ? I don't think I get it fully !
well "Lucretia Mott ...., arguing in a treatise" is giving a notion that he is putting arguments and rebutting counterarguments in a continuous fashion ,something of a kind that a lawyer wud do in a courtroom ----this is not possible

but
when u say-- a treatise that argued for --that means that points have been mentioned in favor of something ,which is very much possible in a book !!
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:52 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

In 1850 Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal political and legal rights and for changes in the married women's property laws.

A.arguing in a treatise for women to have equal political and legal rights
B.arguing in a treatise for equal political and legal rights for women
C.a treatise that advocates women's equal political and legal rights
D.a treatise advocating women's equal political and legal rights
E.a treatise that argued for equal political and legal rights for women
In A, it is unclear whether for women serves as an adjective modifying a treatise (A TREATISE for women) or as an adverb modifying arguing (ARGUING for women).
It must be clear what a modifier is modifying.
Eliminate A.

In B, it is unclear whether for equal political and legal rights for women serves as an adjective modifying a treatise (A TREATISE for equal political and legal rights for women) or as an adverb modifying arguing (ARGUING for equal political and legal rights for women).
It must be clear what a modifier is modifying.
Eliminate B.

In C, a treatise that advocates RIGHTS and FOR changes is not parallel.
Eliminate C.

In D, a treatise advocating RIGHTS and FOR changes is not parallel.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is E.
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
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:13 am
Location: India
Thanked: 22 times
Followed by:7 members
GMAT Score:540

by sahilchaudhary » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:31 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Thanks for the explantion GMATGuruNY.
Sahil Chaudhary
If you find this post helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
https://www.sahilchaudhary007.blocked
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 6:18 pm

by Alchemist14 » Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:52 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

GMATGuruNY wrote:
In 1850 Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on Women, arguing in a treatise for women to have equal political and legal rights and for changes in the married women's property laws.

A.arguing in a treatise for women to have equal political and legal rights
B.arguing in a treatise for equal political and legal rights for women
C.a treatise that advocates women's equal political and legal rights
D.a treatise advocating women's equal political and legal rights
E.a treatise that argued for equal political and legal rights for women
In A, it is unclear whether for women serves as an adjective modifying a treatise (A TREATISE for women) or as an adverb modifying arguing (ARGUING for women).
It must be clear what a modifier is modifying.
Eliminate A.

In B, it is unclear whether for equal political and legal rights for women serves as an adjective modifying a treatise (A TREATISE for equal political and legal rights for women) or as an adverb modifying arguing (ARGUING for equal political and legal rights for women).
It must be clear what a modifier is modifying.
Eliminate B.

In C, a treatise that advocates RIGHTS and FOR changes is not parallel.
Eliminate C.

In D, a treatise advocating RIGHTS and FOR changes is not parallel.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is E.
Great Explanation GMATguru.

The main clause states that she published X and the dependent clause uses 'comma + ING '. 'Comma + ING' takes the tense of the main verb and modifies the subject of the previous clause. So this means that Lucretia Mott argued for something as/while she published something. This is illogical right?

Or 'Comma + ING' represents 1. A consequence of 2. More information about the previous clause. So again 'arguing' and 'publishing' are two different things.

I used this logic to eliminate A and B. Is this line of reasoning correct?

Thanks in Advance.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:41 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Alchemist14 wrote:Great Explanation GMATguru.

The main clause states that she published X and the dependent clause uses 'comma + ING '. 'Comma + ING' takes the tense of the main verb and modifies the subject of the previous clause. So this means that Lucretia Mott argued for something as/while she published something. This is illogical right?

Or 'Comma + ING' represents 1. A consequence of 2. More information about the previous clause. So again 'arguing' and 'publishing' are two different things.

I used this logic to eliminate A and B. Is this line of reasoning correct?

Thanks in Advance.
This line of reasoning is valid.
Generally, COMMA + VERBIng serves to express an action that is attributed to the nearest preceding SUBJECT and that occurs as part of the nearest preceding ACTION.
A and B: Lucretia Mott published her Discourse on Women, arguing in a treatise.
Here, the usage of COMMA + arguing implies that Lucretia Mott was ARGUING at the same time as she PUBLISHED.
This meaning is nonsensical.
Eliminate A and B.
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
Top
Post new topic Locked