sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

I would go with B because I feel in A "it" is ambiguous and can refer back to budget also.......whats the OA????

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

Hi,
'it' cannot refer to the individuals of the assembly. It can refer to the assembly as a whole. So, we need to precisely say Assemblymen.

BUT assembly by itself is a collective noun, and IT can refer to assembly.

Eg: The assembly met at 8am in the morning. It called off at 12 noon.
Is this wrong?

Frankenstein wrote:

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

Hi,
'it' cannot refer to the individuals of the assembly. It can refer to the assembly as a whole. So, we need to precisely say Assemblymen.

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

Both seem to be correct. Can you let me know the source?

What you feel about aspirant's comment above?

that it can refer to both assembly and budget, and thus it is ambiguous.

EducationAisle wrote:

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

Both seem to be correct. Can you let me know the source?

sameerballani wrote:BUT assembly by itself is a collective noun, and IT can refer to assembly.

Eg: The assembly met at 8am in the morning. It called off at 12 noon.
Is this wrong?

Frankenstein wrote:

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

Hi,
'it' cannot refer to the individuals of the assembly. It can refer to the assembly as a whole. So, we need to precisely say Assemblymen.

Hi,
Assembly when talked of as a whole is singular.
Meaning is important in this case:
Let's say, in a team meeting few players in the team said 'choose batting if we win toss' and others said ' choose fielding if we win toss'. It is not that the team as a whole disagreed. It is the members who did not agree with one another.
The team as a whole disagreed means the team's collective decision is not to agree with someone else.

I feel that when we say it could not agree ON something. We simply say that assembly as a whole was not able to come to consensus regarding something. and this perfectly goes with the meaning.
Are you sure that IT will refer to only assembly and cannot refer to budget? DO u feel IT has clear antecedent?

Frankenstein wrote:

sameerballani wrote:BUT assembly by itself is a collective noun, and IT can refer to assembly.

Eg: The assembly met at 8am in the morning. It called off at 12 noon.
Is this wrong?

Frankenstein wrote:

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

Hi,
'it' cannot refer to the individuals of the assembly. It can refer to the assembly as a whole. So, we need to precisely say Assemblymen.

Hi,
Assembly when talked of as a whole is singular.
Meaning is important in this case:
Let's say, in a team meeting few players in the team said 'choose batting if we win toss' and others said ' choose fielding if we win toss'. It is not that the team as a whole disagreed. It is the members who did not agree with one another.
The team as a whole disagreed means the team's collective decision is not to agree with someone else.

sameerballani wrote:I feel that when we say it could not agree ON something. We simply say that assembly as a whole was not able to come to consensus regarding something. and this perfectly goes with the meaning.
Are you sure that IT will refer to only assembly and cannot refer to budget? DO u feel IT has clear antecedent?

Hi,
Pronoun ambiguity is the last thing to be checked. If you go with the meaning 'budget' could not agree doesn't make sense. So, only logical antecedent of 'it' is Assembly.

Hi,
Actually out of two options present here, only option B was present in the question and is OA.
Similar to this option A, there was another option: it could not agree about. This was wrong because of wrong idiom.

I made up this option A to test/clarify my learning/doubt.

Thanks

EducationAisle wrote:

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

Both seem to be correct. Can you let me know the source?

sameerballani wrote:Last year, the State Assembly failed to pass a balanced budget because they could not agree on certain key provisions.

A)it could not agree on
B)the Assemblymen could not agree on

[spoiler]OA: Later[/spoiler]
Please discuss each choice.

Thanks

Hi, nice question.

Pronoun ambiguity is not at all an issue here. Pronoun ambiguity comes in only when two logically possible antecedents are present. for ex: Source:- some grammer book

Rajiv told his friend that HE had won the election.

here, HE is ambiguous. But in the original question, logically only assembly can be only possible antecedent hence no pronoun ambiguity is there. However, the question is purely based on meaning clarity. The error is subtle and that's why this problem is very tricky. In "State Assembly" there are two set of people..one who agreed to the key points and other who do not. As we are talking about that whole agreement thing i think we should address the individuals that is the assemblymen.

By the way, wat's the source??? is it an official question???