Source: KAPLAN 800
In the mid-fifth century, Rome was threatened by Hunnish troops who, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated his military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city.
A: who, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated his military superiority
B: which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority
C: that Attila the Hum led, who demonstrated his military superiority
D: that Attila the Hum led in demonstrated of their military superiority
E: that were led by Attila the Hum, who demonstrated his military superiority
OA: B
A, C and E are incorrect because of HIS. What about B and D?
Can WHICH refer to TROOPS? Why?
Rome
- asamaverick
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:29 am
- Location: Boston, MA
- Thanked: 26 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:700
- tpr-becky
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:08 pm
- Location: Irvine, CA
- Thanked: 199 times
- Followed by:85 members
- GMAT Score:750
which is fine for troops, it doesn't carry a plural or singular - the donuts, which were stale, had been left out all week. If you typed D correctly it is also wrong becuase you don't lead in demonstrated.
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
- sumanr84
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 758
- Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
- Location: Bangalore,India
- Thanked: 67 times
- Followed by:2 members
IMO : E
I donot see any problem with E. In case of E, there is no ambiguity because his is singular and can only refer to Atila the hun.
However, I am little bit suspicious about this question. The reason being how we are supposed to know that Question meant to showcase TROOPS' superiority(ans:B) instead of Atilla's(ans:E).
It seems there are 2 possible correct answers with different meaning.
I donot see any problem with E. In case of E, there is no ambiguity because his is singular and can only refer to Atila the hun.
However, I am little bit suspicious about this question. The reason being how we are supposed to know that Question meant to showcase TROOPS' superiority(ans:B) instead of Atilla's(ans:E).
It seems there are 2 possible correct answers with different meaning.
I am on a break !!
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 809
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:10 pm
- Thanked: 50 times
- Followed by:4 members
Lets B put into original sentence
In the mid-fifth century, Rome was threatened by Hunnish troops which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city.
"led by Attila the Hum" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
"which demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
Is it correct?
In the mid-fifth century, Rome was threatened by Hunnish troops which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city.
"led by Attila the Hum" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
"which demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
Is it correct?
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:39 pm
- GMAT Score:660
@ansumania , very valid point about the comma . IMO - E also.
However , after reading Akhilesh's example the meaning of sentence changes in E
Author is trying to tell the "superiority of troops" not "superiority of Attila "
Still confused but very good question ..
However , after reading Akhilesh's example the meaning of sentence changes in E
Author is trying to tell the "superiority of troops" not "superiority of Attila "
Still confused but very good question ..
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 995
- Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
- Thanked: 31 times
- Followed by:1 members
Why E is incorrect ?
Can somebody please explain.
Between B and E, meaning of the sentence is changing : superiority of troops or superiority of Attila.
From the original choice, the meaning is not clear.
So how to eliminate E ?
Can somebody please explain.
Between B and E, meaning of the sentence is changing : superiority of troops or superiority of Attila.
From the original choice, the meaning is not clear.
So how to eliminate E ?
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:14 am
- Location: Pune, India
- Thanked: 31 times
- Followed by:2 members
I get very angry after seeing these shitty questions from kaplan..
B does not have comma before which...n its OA...now since og10 days... we have been learning that which should be preceded and followed by comma when which does not appear along with any preposition...
E is perfectly OK since there are no grammatical errors in this sentence except it being a bit wordy...
Now
B does not have comma before which...n its OA...now since og10 days... we have been learning that which should be preceded and followed by comma when which does not appear along with any preposition...
E is perfectly OK since there are no grammatical errors in this sentence except it being a bit wordy...
Now
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:08 am
- Thanked: 6 times
Bit confusing in usage of comma after " which". Two choices dwindle " Troops" in opetion "b" and Attila " E" .Since in the begning you have given " HIS" in " RED ,B is the only option.akhp77 wrote:Lets B put into original sentence
In the mid-fifth century, Rome was threatened by Hunnish troops which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city.
"led by Attila the Hum" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
"which demonstrated their military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city" modifies to "Hunnish troops".
Is it correct?
Any ways good question
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:37 am
I totally agree with the above thought.sumanr84 wrote:IMO : E
I donot see any problem with E. In case of E, there is no ambiguity because his is singular and can only refer to Atila the hun.
I rejected B straight away because it uses "which" without comma. Which can be used without a comma only when it come with a preposition eg "for which"
If we apply the "Essential vs Non-Essential" rule that if the information about troops is necessary then we should use that.
E is perfectly correct.Experts please respond
- troh
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:32 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- GMAT Score:650
bc the anticedent is not "someone"ansumania wrote:will someone pl. explain what is wrong with C?
the whole logic seems that we have to find the most appropriate answer to the Q.
and also think about the right place of "comma".
- troh
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:32 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- GMAT Score:650
In the mid-fifth century, Rome was threatened by Hunnish troops who, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated his military superiority over the weakened, recently conquered city.
A: who, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated his military superiority
B: which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority
C: that Attila the Hum led, who demonstrated his military superiority
D: that Attila the Hum led in demonstrated of their military superiority
E: that were led by Attila the Hum, who demonstrated his military superiority
IMO
A: who - fault
B: answer
C: Hum led, who <- ambiguous "who" position.
D: "in" -> in which Attila the Hum led
E: the troops that were led by Attlia the Hum -> the troops led by Attila the Hum : redundancy
A: who, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated his military superiority
B: which, led by Attila the Hum, demonstrated their military superiority
C: that Attila the Hum led, who demonstrated his military superiority
D: that Attila the Hum led in demonstrated of their military superiority
E: that were led by Attila the Hum, who demonstrated his military superiority
IMO
A: who - fault
B: answer
C: Hum led, who <- ambiguous "who" position.
D: "in" -> in which Attila the Hum led
E: the troops that were led by Attlia the Hum -> the troops led by Attila the Hum : redundancy
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:37 am
I dont see any redundancy in E. "That were led by XXX" is modifying "troops". If you think introduction of "that" is causing the redundancy then you can have a look at the sentence belowtroh wrote: E: the troops that were led by Attlia the Hum -> the troops led by Attila the Hum : redundancy
The house that has been painted red is owned by me.