Sentence Correction

The Bunsen burner, named after the German scientist who improved its design and efficiency, was invented in 1885 not by Bunsen himself but by fellow scientist Michael Faraday.

A)named after the German scientist who improved its design and efficiency, was invented in 1885 not by Bunsen himself but by fellow scientist Michael Faraday

B)which was named for the German scientist who improved its design and efficiency, was not invented in 1885 by Bunsen himself but, rather, by Michael Faraday, his fellow scientist

C)which is named for the German scientist improving its design and efficiency, was invented not by Bunsen himself but, rather, by Michael Faraday, a fellow scientist in 1885

D)named for the German scientist improving its design and efficiency, was not invented by Bunsen himself but by Michael Faraday, a fellow scientist, in 1885

E)naming after the German scientist who had improved its design and efficiency, was invented not by Bunsen himself, but, rather, by fellow scientist Michael Faraday in 1885


OA A

I just want to know the reason to eliminate option [spoiler]B&C[/spoiler]. Also the usage of WHICH in both options.

Experts please explain.

Thanks

anant03 wrote:I just want to know the reason to eliminate option [spoiler]B&C[/spoiler]. Also the usage of WHICH in both options.

This SC question seems to offer many decision points. Answer choices A, D, and E do not use which to start the modifier, while choices B and C do. Some of the choices use named after, while others use named for.

While I tend tend to prefer named after to named for, I am not sure that there is any real difference.

Similarly, while using the answer choices that do not include which seems to create a more concise sentence, using which still seems ok.

So what's the strategy to use here?

The way to go here is to look for decision points that are clearer and that allow one to eliminate answer choices with certainty. If none are to be found, then fine, use named after and the use of which to make a choice, but I would much prefer to find something I can really count on.

So let's look at choices B and C with that strategy in mind.

In choice B there is a clear decision point. The wording was not invented in 1885 by Bunsen himself places the emphasis on when the burner was not invented rather than on who didn't do it. In other words we read not invented in 1885, rather than not by Bunsen. That wording is a sub optimal structure that creates an ambiguous or distorted meaning. So we can eliminate B based on that issue.

Notice, one doesn't even need to know any grammar rules to figure that out.

Also there is a parallelism issue in B. invented in 1885 is compared with by Michael Faraday. Look what we get if we remove by Bunsen - was not invented in 1885, but, rather, by Michael Faraday. Contrast that with the structure in choice A - not by Bunsen himself but by...Michael Faraday.

So we have at least two clear decision points that we can use to eliminate B.

C too one can eliminate with certainty. For one thing we are talking about something that happened in 1885, way in the past, but rather than having the past tense, German scientist who improved, this answer choice has the present tense German scientist improving. Given that he worked in 1885 and given what I understand to be the correct meaning to be conveyed here, I don't believe the sentence should say that he is improving the burner but rather that he improved it.

Also, look at the placement of in 1885 in choice C. Rather than being placed in such a way as to indicate that the burner was invented in 1885, now the placement of in 1885 at the end results in a sentence that seems to convey that Bunsen and Faraday were fellow scientists in 1885. So the modifier is misplaced, and because of that misplacement the meaning is unclear or distorted.

So I am not sure whether I completely answered your question, because I am not 100% sure that there is not an issue with the use of which, though I can say the sentences without which seem more concise. Still, I can tell you this much, I don't think that that distinction, if it actually is one, will ever be the key decision point of an official question. Also, without being sure about that distinction and by using, among others, the method I just described, I basically get official SC questions right every time. So be sure to look for clear decision points as doing that is the path to SC success.

anant03 wrote:
I just want to know the reason to eliminate option [spoiler]B&C[/spoiler]. Also the usage of WHICH in both options.

Experts please explain.

Thanks

I'm no expert but Ill try to explain.
We can easily eliminate options B and C and lead to the right answer.

Which can refer to Bunsen burner correctly. But in these two options there are a couple of issues that result in eliminating them as Marty explained above. They are

1. named for-Although I could not find any concrete explanation against it. I think this usage is wrong here as it does not provide intended meaning. Ill try to explain my understading.

Named after- name sb/sth after sb/sth
to give someone or something the same "‹name as another "‹person or thing as a token of respect.

Paul was "‹named after his "‹grandfather.
Washington is named after the USA president Washington.

Named for indicates the purpose for which you are naming the thing or person. As for indicates a purpose naturally.

2. but and rather both words indicate the contrast needed in the meaning but presence of both is redundant.

3. wrong placement of time period 1885 and present continuous tense improving in C.

4. Even though burner got named in the past, we should use simple past tense for that event.
was named gives wrong meaning in B.

5. Similarly is named in present tense completely changes the meaning of the sentence in C.

6. Last but not the least improper not X but Y idiom usage.

Mechmeera wrote: 2. but and rather both words indicate the contrast needed in the meaning but presence of both is redundant.

While using only but is more concise in this case, I am not sure that I would eliminate the answer only because rather is used in addition to but. At least be careful with that idea.

4. Even though burner got named in the past, we should use simple past tense for that event.
was named gives wrong meaning in B.

was named is a passive form that works with which. You would not say "which named..."

5. Similarly is named in present tense completely changes the meaning of the sentence in C.

That's too debatable to use as a decision point. People often say "is named" in cases like this.

Other than those, nice work Meera. Maybe overall you could be a little more careful about jumping on things as decision points. Even the named for thing is not a clear decision point. So while your analysis is useful and interesting, as you did not come to a firm conclusion about named for, maybe you should not cite that possible issue as a real reason for eliminating answer choices.

Marty Murray wrote:

Mechmeera wrote: 2. but and rather both words indicate the contrast needed in the meaning but presence of both is redundant.

While using only but is more concise in this case, I am not sure that I would eliminate the answer only because rather is used in addition to but. At least be careful with that idea.

4. Even though burner got named in the past, we should use simple past tense for that event.
was named gives wrong meaning in B.

was named is a passive form that works with which. You would not say "which named..."

5. Similarly is named in present tense completely changes the meaning of the sentence in C.

That's too debatable to use as a decision point. People often say "is named" in cases like this.

Other than those, nice work Meera. Maybe overall you could be a little more careful about jumping on things as decision points. Even the named for thing is not a clear decision point. So while your analysis is useful and interesting, as you did not come to a firm conclusion about named for, maybe you should not cite that possible issue as a real reason for eliminating answer choices.

im not convinced regarding was named. I feel it implies meaning it was named X then but not now anymore.

Mechmeera wrote:

Marty Murray wrote:

Mechmeera wrote: 4. Even though burner got named in the past, we should use simple past tense for that event.
was named gives wrong meaning in B.

was named is a passive form that works with which. You would not say "which named..."

5. Similarly is named in present tense completely changes the meaning of the sentence in C.

That's too debatable to use as a decision point. People often say "is named" in cases like this.

Other than those, nice work Meera. Maybe overall you could be a little more careful about jumping on things as decision points. Even the named for thing is not a clear decision point. So while your analysis is useful and interesting, as you did not come to a firm conclusion about named for, maybe you should not cite that possible issue as a real reason for eliminating answer choices.

im not convinced regarding was named. I feel it implies meaning it was named X then but not now anymore.

Ok. If you use which, you need the passive form though. So with which you have to use either was named, or is named. I guess that gives one even more reason to refrain from using which there.

You are noticing things and doing some good analysis Meera. So maybe if you are just a little more choosy with your decision points, and less insistent about ones that are actually debatable, you will totally rock SC.

Thank you very much for correcting me Marty.
Your suggestions cleared the concept for me.

very helpful advice Marty.
Well i hope answer would be D ?

anuragbhatt30 wrote:Well i hope answer would be D ?

Anurag, look more closely at D.

D)named for the German scientist improving its design and efficiency, was not invented by Bunsen himself but by Michael Faraday, a fellow scientist, in 1885.

Does scientist improving make sense? Do you feel that he is currently improving it?

Also look further along and you will see that not invented is incorrectly paired with but by Micheal Faraday. That part would be better as invented not by Bunsen himself but by Micheal Faraday.

Hi Marty,
Comments inline :

Does scientist improving make sense? Do you feel that he is currently improving it?

Well this sentence is said in past context. Improving doesn't mean it is still improving.
It meant for past continuous as per context. Thats what I learned from MGMAT books

Also look further along and you will see that not invented is incorrectly paired with but by Micheal Faraday. That part would be better as invented not by Bunsen himself but by Micheal Faraday.

not invented by x but by y
Isn't it parallel ?

anuragbhatt30 wrote:Hi Marty,
Comments inline :

Does scientist improving make sense? Do you feel that he is currently improving it?

Well this sentence is said in past context. Improving doesn't mean it is still improving.
It meant for past continuous as per context. Thats what I learned from MGMAT books

That's not right. You are seeking to apply a rule or convention without really looking at what the words are adding up to, and doing that is not giving you good results. Choice D definitely conveys that he is improving it still.

Also look further along and you will see that not invented is incorrectly paired with but by Micheal Faraday. That part would be better as invented not by Bunsen himself but by Micheal Faraday.

not invented by x but by y
Isn't it parallel ?

Hmm. Good question. Maybe somehow it is. Maybe invented is not present but is understood after but. I am not 100% sure.

Still invented not by x but by y is clearer and tighter.