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

Redeem

MEaning based SC. !

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 9:00 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

MEaning based SC. !

by mirantdon » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:54 am
In an earlier configuration, the crosspiece of the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa is made of beech wood, but now it is fitted with a crosspiece made of metal, thereby stabilizing the painting's poplar support and preventing cracks and warping.

(A)

In an earlier configuration, the crosspiece of the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa is made of beech wood, but now it is
(B)

According to an earlier configuration, the crosspiece of the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa was made of beech wood, but now it is
your answer
(C)

Once configured with a crosspiece made of beech wood, the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa is now
correct
(D)

The frame enclosing the Mona Lisa, once configured with a crosspiece made of beech wood, but now


(E)

The frame enclosing the Mona Lisa was once configured having its crosspiece made of beech wood but now


Somebody please clarify this doubt of mine. ! Should the initial meaning of the sentence be taken at face value . ? How can one predict the meaning of the sentence if it is not correct in the initial statement itself ?
Do you need to make a rational choice or something ?
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:22 pm
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:18 members

by Ilana@EconomistGMAT » Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:00 am
Sometimes we need to discern the 'intended meaning' of the original sentence, if there is something illogical about it. What precisely troubled you about the original sentence? Can you be more specific about your doubt?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 9:00 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

by mirantdon » Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:49 am
Thanks Ilana for the support
If you were to read the first statement, there seems to be a contrast between the usage of the two materials used i.e, Wood and metal Where the statement seems to say that a metal was used instead of the wood.
But the correct answer seems to say that wood was used but the metal was used to reinforce the frame. Logically seems true.
This is why I asked whether I need to make a rational decision rather than taking the initial statement as correct.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:34 am
Thanked: 38 times
Followed by:1 members

by sl750 » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:07 am
Choice C is NOT saying that the wooden frame is being supported by a metal frame. All it is saying is that in the past wood was used to design the frame and in the present metal is being used
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:22 pm
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:18 members

by Ilana@EconomistGMAT » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:18 am
I wouldn't say that the original sentence confuses or contrasts wood with metal. The problem is the ambiguity of the pronoun "it", and the awkward sentence construction.

In an earlier configuration, the crosspiece of the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa is made of beech wood, but now **it** is fitted with a crosspiece made of metal, thereby stabilizing the painting's poplar support and preventing cracks and warping.

In the original sentence, the pronoun "it" could refer either to the crosspiece or to the frame. If we take it to refer to the crosspiece we get an illogical statement: the crosspiece is fitted with a crosspiece. It is more logical to assume that the frame is now fitted with a metal crosspiece, whereas formerly it was fitted with a beech crosspiece. Therefore, we look for an answer that gets rid of the ambiguity of the pronoun "it".

Answer choice D achieves this because it doesn't use the construction "crosspiece of the frame", but breaks apart this troublesome construction (which was the culprit that creates the ambiguity). The corrected sentence begins with a modifier "once configured with a crosspiece" and then goes on to describe the frame, in the main sentence. Note that this corrected sentence construction gets rid of the pronoun "it" altogether, and therefore gets rid of the ambiguity, and achieves greater clarity, in a sentence without any logical traps.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Wed Oct 05, 2011 6:27 am
Hi, which test prep company CAT is this Sc from ?
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 9:00 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

by mirantdon » Wed Oct 05, 2011 8:55 am
ya i got this in one of my Knewton cats .
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:37 am
Thanked: 3 times

by studentps2011 » Wed Oct 05, 2011 9:00 am
Ilana@MasterGMAT wrote:I wouldn't say that the original sentence confuses or contrasts wood with metal. The problem is the ambiguity of the pronoun "it", and the awkward sentence construction.

In an earlier configuration, the crosspiece of the frame enclosing the Mona Lisa is made of beech wood, but now **it** is fitted with a crosspiece made of metal, thereby stabilizing the painting's poplar support and preventing cracks and warping.

In the original sentence, the pronoun "it" could refer either to the crosspiece or to the frame. If we take it to refer to the crosspiece we get an illogical statement: the crosspiece is fitted with a crosspiece. It is more logical to assume that the frame is now fitted with a metal crosspiece, whereas formerly it was fitted with a beech crosspiece. Therefore, we look for an answer that gets rid of the ambiguity of the pronoun "it".

Answer choice D achieves this because it doesn't use the construction "crosspiece of the frame", but breaks apart this troublesome construction (which was the culprit that creates the ambiguity). The corrected sentence begins with a modifier "once configured with a crosspiece" and then goes on to describe the frame, in the main sentence. Note that this corrected sentence construction gets rid of the pronoun "it" altogether, and therefore gets rid of the ambiguity, and achieves greater clarity, in a sentence without any logical traps.
Isn't C the answer?
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:38 am
Hey all,

Good discussion - and let me clear something up about "meaning". Your job on SC is to select the correct answer, which must be:

-Grammatically correct
-Logically valid

That's it. There's nothing in the rules that say you need to preserve the original meaning or interpret the intended meaning. The directions for SC are (I'm including the relevant portions, courtesy OG 12):
Choose the answer that produces the most effective sentence; this answer should be clear and exact, without awkwardness, ambiguity, redundancy, or grammatical error.

If you think the original phrasing is best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose one of the others.

Nothing says that you have to give any preference to the original. And the instructions that can be related to meaning are "effective sentence", "without awkwardness, ambiguity, redundancy". Illogical sentences are ineffective (they're worse than saying nothing at all), they're awkward, and they're often ambiguous (since the meaning confuses the reader). That's why you have to remove illogical meanings, but any other meaning is fine. Whether the crosspiece has been replaced, reinforced, whatever - as long as the meaning "makes sense" you're fine.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:45 am
Thanks Brian
But what iof the original sentence has no grammatical errors and and an option has no errors too.Yet, the option changes the meaning . so, should we stick to the original sentence
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:27 am
Good question - but that's just it...they WON'T ask you to choose between two grammatically-and-logically correct sentences. That would be like having these answers to a quant problem:

(A) 1.5
(B) 3/2
(C) 6/4
(D) 3x/2x
(E) -(-1.5)

At that point it's just a terrible question. GMAT verbal always has one correct and four incorrect answer choices, and the incorrect answer choices are WRONG, not just "less right".
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 9:00 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:700

by mirantdon » Wed Oct 05, 2011 10:23 pm
@Brian : I admit this makes a lot of sense. But, since I have read Stacey s post regarding the increased emphasis on meaning in the Sentence correction where there could be multiple options that could be grammatically correct but still have meaning issues, I have started to feel a little more skeptical about my answer choices. My earlier take on Sentence correction was similar to what you just quoted ( there will be something wrong somewhere in the four other options. But,now when you are pitted against two answer choices that are actually grammatically true but have meaning issues. It makes me wonder which option should I consider as my baseline . ? there is no baseline whatsoever. !!
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Thu Oct 06, 2011 8:01 am
Someone asked me to weigh in on this - I don't normally post on the forums, but I will on this one. :)

Brian is absolutely right that the directions make no mention of needing to preserve the original meaning (and, of course, sometimes the original meaning is actually illogical or ambiguous and needs to be corrected!). Interestingly, one the GMAC folks at the recent conference did make a verbal reference to maintaining the original meaning - so we need to ask them to clarify whether this is actually a consideration when they write questions.

It's possible to write something that is *technically* grammatically correct and yet still ambiguous or unclear in some way, and I think this is what GMAC means when it says that there can be two answers that are grammatically correct. Unclear / ambiguous is incorrect, even if there is a properly conjugated verb to go with the subject and so on.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1