1000 SC - 415

[jangojess]

In the minds of many people living in England, before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes, the opposite pole to civilization, an obscure and unimaginable place that was considered the end of the world.

(A) before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes
(B) before there was Australia, it was the antipodes
(C) it was the antipodes that was Australia
(D) Australia was what was the antipodes
(E) Australia was what had been known as the antipodes

OA - A

Didnt actually get what this sentence meant??

[pahwa]

I was confused when I first came across this during my prep. I actually made this as a separate point in my notes.

"Before Australia was Australia" is very very uncommon. But as GMAT says, "Choose the best among the following" means, it need not be always correct!!!

Lets go by same old process of elimination

B: "It" refers to "Australia" or "England". Not clear. Ignore it.
C: "IT" has no referent here. What I mean is, you know "logically" that it refers to Australia. But, a simple rule "Pronoun is used instead of Noun". What I am stressing is, a sentence should have noun and only then refer that noun by a pronoun.
But here, Australia is never mentioned before use of "IT". Ignore it.

D: was...was is redundant. Moreover, I feel that situation could be dealt more economically in terms of words. No need for WHAT. Ignore.

E: Had been. See, use had/had been when you actually need it.

Go with A.

[real2008]

I was confused when I first came across this during my prep. I actually made this as a separate point in my notes.

"Before Australia was Australia" is very very uncommon. But as GMAT says, "Choose the best among the following" means, it need not be always correct!!!

Lets go by same old process of elimination

B: "It" refers to "Australia" or "England". Not clear. Ignore it.
C: "IT" has no referent here. What I mean is, you know "logically" that it refers to Australia. But, a simple rule "Pronoun is used instead of Noun". What I am stressing is, a sentence should have noun and only then refer that noun by a pronoun.
But here, Australia is never mentioned before use of "IT". Ignore it.

D: was...was is redundant. Moreover, I feel that situation could be dealt more economically in terms of words. No need for WHAT. Ignore.

E: Had been. See, use had/had been when you actually need it.


Go with A.

As per your explanation for choice B, this can be applied to choice A too. Choice A also contains the word "it" and how does your explanation support the right answer for A?

[Arsene Lupin]

Really bizarre question.

What is wrong with the verb tense in E? "Had been" seems fine since the "knowing" happened before the "being". (It might be wrong since the knowing continues to this day, not sure)

Even though, how can A be correct? Isn't "it" ambiguous here?

What is the source of this question mate?

I'd shoot myself if this is from some official source.

[perfectstranger]

I would go with choice ''E''

In the minds of many people living in England, before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes, the opposite pole to civilization, an obscure and unimaginable place that was considered the end of the world.

(A) before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes
(B) before there was Australia, it was the antipodes
(C) it was the antipodes that was Australia
(D) Australia was what was the antipodes
(E) Australia was what had been known as the antipodes

A and B has no clear referrent of ''it''. In A before Australia was Australia like a story sentence or something.
C it has no referrent
D was....was ambigious
E Well to critize had been known may be wrong tense used here , yet in my choice best answer since Australia had been known as Antellope before it was called Australia.

[sogmat]

can someone please explain again. dont really get it

[theforrestgump]

From MGMAT SC guide pg.73

7. The players' helmets need to be repainted before they are used in Sunday's game.
CORRECT.
Helmets is the antecedent of they. You need not worry that they could refer to players', because (1)helmets is closer to they, and
(2) players' is a possessive noun, and is therefore not a good antecedent
for a pronoun in the subjective case(they)- Recall the Poisons Rule.

Similarly in the question above the first half "In the minds of many people living in England" is in the possessive form.
Minds of X the X= people living in England, acts as one long subject.

Hence, it can refer only to Australia.
Therefore the construction in (A) is correct.

Coming to
(E) Australia was what had been known as the antipodes
the "had been known" is improperly used here. You DO NOT need a "had been", which is a past perfect since we are not talking about any event that occurred in the past before another event.

Hope this clears things up
(Your "Thanks" will be much appreciated )

Btw, the question is from OG (10th ed) - SC - #43

[[email protected]]

Could any of the experts please help in understanding this question carefully!!!
Since this is an OG question, this is a request that all the guyzz as well as all the experts please try this question....

According to the rules in GMAT when you have to consider the best out of the 5 options, I would choose the option E and not A....