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

Redeem

SC from veritas prep CAT

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1578
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 8:02 am
Thanked: 128 times
Followed by:34 members
GMAT Score:760

SC from veritas prep CAT

by Osirus@VeritasPrep » Sat May 01, 2010 1:45 pm
Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present but they will be or could, be made adequately safe in the future

A) original

B) that they will, or could

C) that they would, or could

D) believe the sweeteners would or could

E) believe that they will be or could

OA[spoiler] E, can someone explain to me the pronoun usage in this one. I thought if a pronoun could have more than one antecedent, then the pronoun is incorrect. In the sentence, can't "they" refer to both scientists (plural) and artificial sweeteners (plural)?[/spoiler]
https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-retake-o ... 51414.html

Brandon Dorsey
GMAT Instructor
Veritas Prep

Buy any Veritas Prep book(s) and receive access to 5 Practice Cats for free! Learn More.
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2109
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:25 pm
Location: New Jersey
Thanked: 109 times
Followed by:79 members
GMAT Score:640

by money9111 » Sat May 01, 2010 4:54 pm
yeah i chose D
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:44 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by suchoudh » Sat May 01, 2010 7:17 pm
"They" can only refer to "sweeteners" because "scientists" cannot be made safer. Since only one of the plural nouns that come before the pronoun "they" can be made "safer," the reference is clear and unambiguous. An error of pronoun reference occurs when you cannot tell which noun is the antecedent of the pronoun.

However, "believe that" is needed in E to introduce an opinion.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 17 times

by loveusonu » Sat May 01, 2010 8:22 pm
osirus0830 wrote:Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present but they will be or could, be made adequately safe in the future

A) original

B) that they will, or could

C) that they would, or could

D) believe the sweeteners would or could

E) believe that they will be or could

OA[spoiler] E, can someone explain to me the pronoun usage in this one. I thought if a pronoun could have more than one antecedent, then the pronoun is incorrect. In the sentence, can't "they" refer to both scientists (plural) and artificial sweeteners (plural)?[/spoiler]
They is ambigious in E as there are multiple plural nouns(scientists, sweeteners), To my opnion, ans should be D.
Sonu
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:31 pm
Thanked: 97 times
Followed by:1 members

by liferocks » Sat May 01, 2010 8:22 pm
I have a question here for the usage of the verb in the option E

will be is future and could be is conditional.... can someone please explain why the sentence has mixed these two verb form.
"If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there."
Lewis Carroll
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Sun May 02, 2010 12:00 am
osirus0830 wrote:Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present but they will be or could, be made adequately safe in the future

A) original

B) that they will, or could

C) that they would, or could

D) believe the sweeteners would or could

E) believe that they will be or could
My pick is D. "THEY" is ambiguous in E and can refer to both scientists (plural) and artificial sweeteners(plural too). The meaning of the sentence should not account for while we are plugging in the PRONOUNs. Simple rule- if the pronoun can be linked to two different nouns that have come previously in the sentence then it is ambiguous.
I am on a break !!
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 305
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:38 am
Thanked: 10 times

by Shawshank » Sun May 02, 2010 12:18 am
IMO -- D..

"They" and "will" both dont look right in "E"..
Can you confirm from your instuctors from veritas.. regarding your OA.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shawshank Redemtion -- Hope is still alive ...
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 526
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:47 pm
Location: India
Thanked: 68 times
GMAT Score:680

by harshavardhanc » Sun May 02, 2010 12:28 am
suchoudh wrote:"They" can only refer to "sweeteners" because "scientists" cannot be made safer. Since only one of the plural nouns that come before the pronoun "they" can be made "safer," the reference is clear and unambiguous. An error of pronoun reference occurs when you cannot tell which noun is the antecedent of the pronoun.

However, "believe that" is needed in E to introduce an opinion.
Osirus,

you must have come across various posts by Ron on this forum as well as the MGMAT forum that pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.

Also, when you find an option in which ambiguity is present, you must look at the bigger picture or the meaning which the option conveys. If it's logical with this ambiguity, you can safely pick it .

For this question, as suchoudh points out they cannot refer to "scientists" , as it would be nonsensical to make scientists safer. Out of the two plural antecedents "they" can only refer to "sweeteners".


Moreover, as one of the other poster has mentioned, you need "that" before " the sweeteners" in the second part.

"scientists believe the sweeteners " in option D, doesn't convey the intended meaning.


Apart from all this, I am copy-pasting an excerpt from Ron's post from MGMAT forum (the ambiguous pronoun here was it):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the general rule is that the pronoun, by default, refers to the noun that plays the same grammatical role in its own clause. so:
* if the pronoun is a subject (as is the case here), then it refers by default to the subject of the other clause.
* if the pronoun is a direct object, then it refers by default to the direct object of the other clause. (i.e., "take the pizza out of the box and put it on the table" --> "it" refers to "pizza" since both are direct objects)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HTH.
Regards,
Harsha
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sun May 02, 2010 1:42 am
i am with E

they refers to sweeteners so need not to repeat as in D

will be means they have to made it and could is for suggestion
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 17 times

by loveusonu » Sun May 02, 2010 1:49 am
harshavardhanc wrote:
suchoudh wrote:"They" can only refer to "sweeteners" because "scientists" cannot be made safer. Since only one of the plural nouns that come before the pronoun "they" can be made "safer," the reference is clear and unambiguous. An error of pronoun reference occurs when you cannot tell which noun is the antecedent of the pronoun.

However, "believe that" is needed in E to introduce an opinion.
Osirus,

you must have come across various posts by Ron on this forum as well as the MGMAT forum that pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.

Also, when you find an option in which ambiguity is present, you must look at the bigger picture or the meaning which the option conveys. If it's logical with this ambiguity, you can safely pick it .

For this question, as suchoudh points out they cannot refer to "scientists" , as it would be nonsensical to make scientists safer. Out of the two plural antecedents "they" can only refer to "sweeteners".


Moreover, as one of the other poster has mentioned, you need "that" before " the sweeteners" in the second part.

"scientists believe the sweeteners " in option D, doesn't convey the intended meaning.


Apart from all this, I am copy-pasting an excerpt from Ron's post from MGMAT forum (the ambiguous pronoun here was it):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the general rule is that the pronoun, by default, refers to the noun that plays the same grammatical role in its own clause. so:
* if the pronoun is a subject (as is the case here), then it refers by default to the subject of the other clause.
* if the pronoun is a direct object, then it refers by default to the direct object of the other clause. (i.e., "take the pizza out of the box and put it on the table" --> "it" refers to "pizza" since both are direct objects)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HTH.
Harsh,
I still feel they is ambiguous over here, could you please elaborate or provide the ron's link?
Sonu
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Sun May 02, 2010 4:37 am
harshavardhanc wrote:
suchoudh wrote:"They" can only refer to "sweeteners" because "scientists" cannot be made safer. Since only one of the plural nouns that come before the pronoun "they" can be made "safer," the reference is clear and unambiguous. An error of pronoun reference occurs when you cannot tell which noun is the antecedent of the pronoun.

However, "believe that" is needed in E to introduce an opinion.
Osirus,

you must have come across various posts by Ron on this forum as well as the MGMAT forum that pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.

Also, when you find an option in which ambiguity is present, you must look at the bigger picture or the meaning which the option conveys. If it's logical with this ambiguity, you can safely pick it .

For this question, as suchoudh points out they cannot refer to "scientists" , as it would be nonsensical to make scientists safer. Out of the two plural antecedents "they" can only refer to "sweeteners".


Moreover, as one of the other poster has mentioned, you need "that" before " the sweeteners" in the second part.

"scientists believe the sweeteners " in option D, doesn't convey the intended meaning.


Apart from all this, I am copy-pasting an excerpt from Ron's post from MGMAT forum (the ambiguous pronoun here was it):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the general rule is that the pronoun, by default, refers to the noun that plays the same grammatical role in its own clause. so:
* if the pronoun is a subject (as is the case here), then it refers by default to the subject of the other clause.
* if the pronoun is a direct object, then it refers by default to the direct object of the other clause. (i.e., "take the pizza out of the box and put it on the table" --> "it" refers to "pizza" since both are direct objects)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HTH.
good post.
But can you please explain why the other choices are wrong. May be I am missing some basic rules here.
C also looking promising. Why 'believe' is must ?
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:08 am
Location: India
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:5 members
GMAT Score:730

by mohit11 » Sun May 02, 2010 5:57 am
harshavardhanc wrote: Osirus,

you must have come across various posts by Ron on this forum as well as the MGMAT forum that pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.

Also, when you find an option in which ambiguity is present, you must look at the bigger picture or the meaning which the option conveys. If it's logical with this ambiguity, you can safely pick it .

For this question, as suchoudh points out they cannot refer to "scientists" , as it would be nonsensical to make scientists safer. Out of the two plural antecedents "they" can only refer to "sweeteners".


Moreover, as one of the other poster has mentioned, you need "that" before " the sweeteners" in the second part.

"scientists believe the sweeteners " in option D, doesn't convey the intended meaning.


Apart from all this, I am copy-pasting an excerpt from Ron's post from MGMAT forum (the ambiguous pronoun here was it):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the general rule is that the pronoun, by default, refers to the noun that plays the same grammatical role in its own clause. so:
* if the pronoun is a subject (as is the case here), then it refers by default to the subject of the other clause.
* if the pronoun is a direct object, then it refers by default to the direct object of the other clause. (i.e., "take the pizza out of the box and put it on the table" --> "it" refers to "pizza" since both are direct objects)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HTH.
Just to add to this.. GMAT prefers thinking words to be followed by "that" ...Think that.. Believe that..etc.

I was a little concerned with the usage of "They" in E. However, as explanation above points out, they refers to sweeteners.

Also, this reminds me of that OG question..about Nuclear stations or something...

Update: Googled the OG question.

A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
(A) that they will, or could,
(B) that they would, or could,
(C) they will be or could
(D) think that they will be or could
(E) think the power stations would or could


OA : D
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 17 times

by loveusonu » Sun May 02, 2010 6:31 am
mohit11 wrote:
harshavardhanc wrote: Osirus,

you must have come across various posts by Ron on this forum as well as the MGMAT forum that pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.

Also, when you find an option in which ambiguity is present, you must look at the bigger picture or the meaning which the option conveys. If it's logical with this ambiguity, you can safely pick it .

For this question, as suchoudh points out they cannot refer to "scientists" , as it would be nonsensical to make scientists safer. Out of the two plural antecedents "they" can only refer to "sweeteners".


Moreover, as one of the other poster has mentioned, you need "that" before " the sweeteners" in the second part.

"scientists believe the sweeteners " in option D, doesn't convey the intended meaning.


Apart from all this, I am copy-pasting an excerpt from Ron's post from MGMAT forum (the ambiguous pronoun here was it):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the general rule is that the pronoun, by default, refers to the noun that plays the same grammatical role in its own clause. so:
* if the pronoun is a subject (as is the case here), then it refers by default to the subject of the other clause.
* if the pronoun is a direct object, then it refers by default to the direct object of the other clause. (i.e., "take the pizza out of the box and put it on the table" --> "it" refers to "pizza" since both are direct objects)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HTH.
Just to add to this.. GMAT prefers thinking words to be followed by "that" ...Think that.. Believe that..etc.

I was a little concerned with the usage of "They" in E. However, as explanation above points out, they refers to sweeteners.

Also, this reminds me of that OG question..about Nuclear stations or something...

Update: Googled the OG question.

A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but that they will, or could, be made sufficiently safe in the future.
(A) that they will, or could,
(B) that they would, or could,
(C) they will be or could
(D) think that they will be or could
(E) think the power stations would or could


OA : D
Nice search Dude, Even this is killing me...I would have gone with E in this case too.
Sonu
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:10 pm
Thanked: 50 times
Followed by:4 members

by akhpad » Sun May 02, 2010 6:31 am
Harsha is correct.

Ron Says that
Pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule to eliminate any option.
The GMAT will usually tolerate pronoun ambiguity if
The context is obvious
The pronoun is parallel to the intended noun
The pronoun is not parallel to the other (wrong word) noun(s)

Harsha already gave you example.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:10 pm
Thanked: 50 times
Followed by:4 members

by akhpad » Sun May 02, 2010 6:57 am
With E
Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present but believe that they will be or could be made adequately safe in the future.

Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present
Most scientists believe that they will be or could be made adequately safe in the future.
=>Better Clarity



With C
Most scientists surveyed view artificial sweeteners as unsafe at present but that they would, or could be made adequately safe in the future

Why do we need comma in "would, or could"? => this first mistake
"be" is also missing. I believe that "be" should not be separated from"will be" or "could be".
If we put "believe" in "but believe that", then it indicates that scientists believe so. => better clarity
Top
Post new topic Locked