British historians have sometimes cited financial concerns a

[hazelnut01]

British historians have sometimes cited financial concerns as the primary cause of the American Revolution, but in doing so, the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment are not given their due.

(A) doing so, the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment are not given their due

(B) doing it, the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment are not given their due

(C) doing so, the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment have not been given their due

(D) doing so, they do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due

(E) doing so, they do not give the due of their ideals to the French Enlightenment of the 18th century

Source : Manhattan Prep
OA=D

[Ali Tariq]

Ignore!
In OA, they(subject pronoun) and their( possessive form) are in same clause and ,thus, must have same antecedent.

The correct version should have been-
(D) doing so, these historians do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due

[elias.latour.apex]

What's wrong with A, B, and C? All of them have a misplaced modifier.

We have two complete sentences joined by a comma but. The second sentence reads:

In doing so, the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment are not given their due.

Yet the ideals are not "doing so."

(D) is the best answer, but does it has pronoun problems? Couldn't the they, at least theoretically, refer back to the financial concerns rather than to the British historians? And what's up with the mid-clause change in the meaning of the word they from historians to ideals? Is that kosher? Are there any OG problems that do so?

There are. Take a look at:

In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell, and they are.

(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have

The OA is D. Let's take a look at the pronouns. The second clause starts with "their wines." Does that clearly refer to the Italian vintner's wines rather than to the prices? GMAC seems to think so. And what's up with the pronoun referent change mid clause? "their wines (those of the vintners) have been prices to sell and they (the wines) do."

Apparently the wines referent between the their and the they permits the referent of the pronoun to change mid-clause. Accordingly, I do not consider the dismissal of this problem justified.

[Ali Tariq]

(D)British historians have sometimes cited financial concerns as the primary cause of the American Revolution, but in doing so, they do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due

Ignore!
In OA, they(subject pronoun) and their( possessive form) are in same clause and ,thus, must have same antecedent.

they and their are in the same clause.

(C)In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines are priced to sell ,and they do

they and their are not in the same clause.

[elias.latour.apex]

Thanks for catching my typo earlier. Of course, the OA is C not D.

Here's another one for you:

Especially in the early years, new entrepreneurs may need to find resourceful ways, like renting temporary office space or using answering services, that make their company seem large and more firmly established than they may actually be.

A) that make their company seem large
B) to make their companies seem larger
C) thus making their companies seem larger
D) so that the companies seem larger
E) of making their company seem large

This is from OG17. The OA is B.

...to make their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.

The their refers to the entrepreneurs whereas the they refers to the companies.

[GMATGuruNY]

Here's another one for you:

Especially in the early years, new entrepreneurs may need to find resourceful ways, like renting temporary office space or using answering services, that make their company seem large and more firmly established than they may actually be.

A) that make their company seem large
B) to make their companies seem larger
C) thus making their companies seem larger
D) so that the companies seem larger
E) of making their company seem large

This is from OG17. The OA is B.

...to make their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.

The their refers to the entrepreneurs whereas the they refers to the companies.

Generally:
Within a SINGLE CLAUSE, forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.

OAs from GMAC:
Their wines have been priced to sell, and they do.
Their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.
In each of these OAs, their is contained within the clause in red, while they is contained within the clause in blue.
Since their and they are not contained within the same clause, neither of these OAs deviates from the general rule above.

The OA at top:
They do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due.
Here, they and their are both contained within the SAME clause.
Since they serves to refer to historians, while their serves to refer to ideals, this OA deviates from the rule that -- within a single clause -- forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.
As a result, this OA does not seem viable.

[Mo2men]

Here's another one for you:

Especially in the early years, new entrepreneurs may need to find resourceful ways, like renting temporary office space or using answering services, that make their company seem large and more firmly established than they may actually be.

A) that make their company seem large
B) to make their companies seem larger
C) thus making their companies seem larger
D) so that the companies seem larger
E) of making their company seem large

This is from OG17. The OA is B.

...to make their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.

The their refers to the entrepreneurs whereas the they refers to the companies.

Generally:
Within a SINGLE CLAUSE, forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.

OAs from GMAC:
Their wines have been priced to sell, and they do.
Their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.
In each of these OAs, their is contained within the clause in red, while they is contained within the clause in blue.
Since their and they are not contained within the same clause, neither of these OAs deviates from the general rule above.

The OA at top:
They do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due.
Here, they and their are both contained within the SAME clause.
Since they serves to refer to historians, while their serves to refer to ideals, this OA deviates from the rule that -- within a single clause -- forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.
As a result, this OA does not seem viable.

Sometimes it is advised not to focus on pronoun ambiguity. Can we deal with sentence at hand in the same way? Does the GMAT deviate from the rule you mentioned above 'within a single clause -- forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent' ?

[elias.latour.apex]

Generally:
Within a SINGLE CLAUSE, forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.

OAs from GMAC:
Their wines have been priced to sell, and they do.
Their companies seem larger and more firmly established than they may actually be.
In each of these OAs, their is contained within the clause in red, while they is contained within the clause in blue.
Since their and they are not contained within the same clause, neither of these OAs deviates from the general rule above.

The OA at top:
They do not give the ideals of the 18th century French Enlightenment their due.
Here, they and their are both contained within the SAME clause.
Since they serves to refer to historians, while their serves to refer to ideals, this OA deviates from the rule that -- within a single clause -- forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.
As a result, this OA does not seem viable.

So basically you are solidly of the opinion that the following two sentences contain pronoun errors?


Carlos gave what comfort he could while his son cried himself to sleep.

John bought his first car on the same day that his brother sold his.

I can't help but wonder what you would change them to.

[GMATGuruNY]

So basically you are solidly of the opinion that the following two sentences contain pronoun errors?


Carlos gave what comfort he could while his son cried himself to sleep.

Here, the usage of himself is viable because a reflexive pronoun serving as a direct object must refer to the preceding subject.
Thus, it's crystal clear that himself (reflexive pronoun) serves to refer to son (the preceding subject).

John bought his first car on the same day that his brother sold his.

I can't help but wonder what you would change them to.

A proper noun on the GMAT will typically refer to a well-known figure.
This constraint allows for a construction like the following:
Picasso sold his first painting on the same day that the artist's brother purchased his first house.

[GMATGuruNY]

Generally:
Within a SINGLE CLAUSE, forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent.

Sometimes it is advised not to focus on pronoun ambiguity. Can we deal with sentence at hand in the same way? Does the GMAT deviate from the rule you mentioned above 'within a single clause -- forms of the same pronoun should have the same referent' ?

An answer choice may be eliminated for pronoun ambiguity only if an alternate answer choice avoids the ambiguity and is free of errors.
If the SC at top were to appear on the GMAT, we would have to select D, since no alternate answer choice avoids the ambiguity in D and is free of errors.
That said:
To my knowledge, no OA from GMAC has violated the blue rule above.

[elias.latour.apex]

Here, the usage of himself is viable because a reflexive pronoun serving as a direct object must refer to the preceding subject.
Thus, it's crystal clear that himself (reflexive pronoun) serves to refer to son (the preceding subject).

So the real rule is that as long as there is no ambiguity in the sentence, it's acceptable.

I, too, could invent clever rules of thumb that would work on all past GMAT sentences (e.g., always prefer whether over if. Never select due to. etc.) and say "To my knowledge, no GMAT sentence has ever violated this rule." In reality, doing so would simply provoke some clever GMAT question writer to construct a new question to prove me wrong.

[GMATGuruNY]

Here, the usage of himself is viable because a reflexive pronoun serving as a direct object must refer to the preceding subject.
Thus, it's crystal clear that himself (reflexive pronoun) serves to refer to son (the preceding subject).

So the real rule is that as long as there is no ambiguity in the sentence, it's acceptable.

Discussion of this rule here and elsewhere has consistently been constrained to subject, object and possessive pronouns.
It should be noted that this rule does not apply to reflexive pronouns, which appear on the GMAT only rarely.

I, too, could invent clever rules of thumb that would work on all past GMAT sentences (e.g., always prefer whether over if. Never select due to. etc.) and say "To my knowledge, no GMAT sentence has ever violated this rule." In reality, doing so would simply provoke some clever GMAT question writer to construct a new question to prove me wrong.

Please note that this rule is not of my invention: it is discussed not only here on BTG but also in many other GMAT resources.
Admittedly, it is perhaps better to deem this "rule" a guideline rather than a hard-and-fast rule.
The inclusion of "generally" in my initial post is to indicate that a test-taker might encounter a rare exception.
Virtually ANY rule may have an exception.
Still, if forms of the same pronoun (reflexive pronouns excluded) appear in the same clause but refer to different antecedents, the result is likely to be confusion.
An answer choice that employs this structure is almost certain to be incorrect.
Both the OA at top and the sentence about John and his brother seem needlessly confusing.
That said -- as noted above and elsewhere -- an answer choice with a potentially ambiguous pronoun should be eliminated only if an alternate answer choice avoids the ambiguity and is free of errors.