Sentence Correction

Antarctica receives more solar radiation than does any other place on Earth, yet the temperatures are so cold and the ice cap is reflective, so that little polar ice melts during the summer; otherwise, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet and engulf most of the world's great cities.

A. is reflective, so that little polar ice melts during the summer; otherwise,
B. is so reflective that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; were it to do so,
C. so reflective that little polar ice melts during the summer, or else
D. reflective, so that little of the polar ice melts during the summer, or
E. reflects so that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; if it did

OA is B.
However in B is the second clause separated by the semi-colon a independent clause??

Abhijit K wrote:Antarctica receives more solar radiation than does any other place on Earth, yet the temperatures are so cold and the ice cap is reflective, so that little polar ice melts during the summer; otherwise, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet and engulf most of the world's great cities.

A. is reflective, so that little polar ice melts during the summer; otherwise,
B. is so reflective that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; were it to do so,
C. so reflective that little polar ice melts during the summer, or else
D. reflective, so that little of the polar ice melts during the summer, or
E. reflects so that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; if it did

A: so cold...so that little polar ice melts
D: so cold...so that little of the polar ice melts
E: so cold...so that little of the polar ice melts
Here, the so's in red are unidiomatic.
The correct idiom is so X that Y.
Eliminate A, B and E.

C: little polar ice MELTS, or else the water levels WOULD RISE
A conjunction such as or cannot serve to connect a present tense clause (ice MELTS) to a subjunctive clause (water levels WOULD RISE).
Eliminate C.

The correct answer is B.

However in B is the second clause separated by the semi-colon a independent clause??

A semi-colon must serve to connect TWO COMPLETE SENTENCES.

OA: Antarctica receives more solar radiation than does any other place on Earth, yet the temperatures are so cold and the ice cap is so reflective that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; were it to do so, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet and engulf most of the world's great cities.
Here, the semi-colon is correctly followed by a complete sentence (the portion in red).

GMATGuruNY wrote:

However in B is the second clause separated by the semi-colon a independent clause??

A semi-colon must serve to connect TWO COMPLETE SENTENCES.

OA: Antarctica receives more solar radiation than does any other place on Earth, yet the temperatures are so cold and the ice cap is so reflective that little of the polar ice melts during the summer; were it to do so, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet and engulf most of the world's great cities.
Here, the semi-colon is correctly followed by a complete sentence (the portion in red).

Here what is the referent of "it"?

Hello Abhijit K, can you please confirm that you actually encountered this question on an official GMAT source. While I have just about started my prep, I am confident that I would not have been able to do it on the exam day anyway:(.

I did a Google search for this question and did not find any references that it was an official question.

So, what do you mean by "GMAT Test 2"?

prachi18oct wrote: Here what is the referent of "it"?

Hello GMATGuruNY, can you please reply. I am also confused by the same question.

prachi18oct wrote: Here what is the referent of "it"?

OA: Little of the polar ice melts during the summer; were it to do so, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet.

Semantically, the only logical referent for it is polar ice.
Intended meaning:
Were the POLAR ICE to melt, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet.
Grammatically, however, it seems to refer to LITTLE of the polar ice -- the subject of the preceding clause -- conveying the following meaning:
Were LITTLE OF THE POLAR ICE to melt, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet.
This latter meaning is nonsensical.

Since pronoun ambiguity is a low-priority issue-- and none of the other answer choices is free of errors -- the OA is the only viable option.
But I am skeptical.
Unless it can be shown that this SC from GMATPrep, I would ignore it.

GMATGuruNY wrote: Semantically, the only logical referent for it is polar ice.

This makes sense; but is it possible that "it" is used as a placeholder here?

bonetlobo wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote: Semantically, the only logical referent for it is polar ice.

This makes sense; but is it possible that "it" is used as a placeholder here?

When it serves as an EXPLETIVE -- a placeholder pronoun -- it still must have a clear referent.
In most cases, the referent will be an infinitive phrase, a that-clause, or a whether-clause that follows the expletive usage of it.
For examples, check my second post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/sentence-str ... 82034.html

OA: Were it to do so, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet.
Here, the portion in red does not contain an infinitive phrase, a that-clause, or a whether-clause that could serve as a referent for it.
Thus, it cannot be serving as an expletive.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

bonetlobo wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote: Semantically, the only logical referent for it is polar ice.

This makes sense; but is it possible that "it" is used as a placeholder here?

When it serves as an EXPLETIVE -- a placeholder pronoun -- it still must have a clear referent.
In most cases, the referent will be an infinitive phrase, a that-clause, or a whether-clause that follows the expletive usage of it.
For examples, check my second post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/sentence-str ... 82034.html

OA: Were it to do so, the water levels of the oceans would rise 250 feet.
Here, the portion in red does not contain an infinitive phrase, a that-clause, or a whether-clause that could serve as a referent for it.
Thus, it cannot be serving as an expletive.

Can the missing verb IS in choices C,D and E be used for eliminating, because phrases 'are so cold ' and 'so reflective' are not parallel ?