Sentence Correction

Correct answer according to the guide is D. I picked E.

My question is this: the correct answer D changes the meaning of the sentence even though it has better grammar.

The original sentence talks about the archaeologist's discovery of a single pharaoh, (not multiple pharaohs) who ruled at the end of Egypt who has less artifacts than his predecessors.

I immediately ruled out any answer choices that spoke of pharaohs in the plural. I understand that E is not grammatically perfect but I thought the main point of any answer in Sentence Correction was that it not change the meaning of the original sentence? Am I wrong? Thanks.

Hi there,

yes, there is a hierarchy in sentence correction: 1) grammatical correctness; 2) preserve intended meaning; and 3) style.

So, grammar is actually more important than meaning. If you chop it down to two choices, and they are both grammatically correct, then select the one that better preserves the speaker's intended meaning.

However, sometimes, a speaker's intended meaning differs from the literal meaning of her words. In other words, sometimes a speaker may hot have said what she actually meant to say. How can you tell? You have to use your critical reasoning skills.

Here, the underlining is:

discovering that a pharoah who had ruled in the last days of Egypt was buried with fewer artifacts than their ...earlier counterparts.

What he means by "a pharoah who ...ruled in the last days of Egypt" is "ANY pharoah who lived in the last days of Egypt." (Like, if I say "a fan of the Raiders would say X", then what I may mean is "ANY fan of the Raiders would say X").

We know this because the speaker is comparing this type of pharoah to earlier counterparts.
So, he is comparing this type of pharoah to something plural, and the plural part is in the non-underlined portion, which is always correct. (Also, if it were just one pharoah, then it probably wouldn't be a "prominent result".)

So, in fact, choice D doesn't change the meaning; instead, it does a better job of conveying the speaker's intended meaning.

Hi Testluv, this is the second time you've helped me this week. I appreciate it.

I knew there was a hierarchy, I just thought that sentence meaning took precedence. Now I know that's not the case.

The words "their" and "counterparts" threw me off. I see what you mean that the the author was most likely trying to compare this type of pharaoh to previous ones. I just wasn't sure how far I was allowed to go in the GMAT in inferring the meaning of a sentence. (I thought I didn't have a lot of leeway).

Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense.

student22 wrote:Hi Testluv, this is the second time you've helped me this week. I appreciate it.

I knew there was a hierarchy, I just thought that sentence meaning took precedence. Now I know that's not the case.

The words "their" and "counterparts" threw me off. I see what you mean that the the author was most likely trying to compare this type of pharaoh to previous ones. I just wasn't sure how far I was allowed to go in the GMAT in inferring the meaning of a sentence. (I thought I didn't have a lot of leeway).

Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense.

No problem.

Here are a couple of tips/rules for ascertaining intended meaning:

1. The non-underlined portion is always correct. Thus, you can use the non-underlined portion to assist in ascertaining intent.

2. The intended meaning can never be anything absurd. So, if the literal meaning is absurd, you know you can eliminate any choices that fail to rectify that absurd meaning. Example: "those houses were destroyed and then damaged".

3. Also, it is rare for the intended meaning to be something that is very unlikely or implausible. I would say this sentence is a good example of this point:

In this sentence, because the non-underlined portion used "counterparts", because the underlined portion used "their", and because it is unlikely that the discovery of a single pharoah would rank as the Professor's "most prominent result", it is very unlikely that the intended meaning was the discovery of a single pharaoh.

Got it, thanks for clarifying how much I can read into the author's intent.