Wednesday, 15 April 2020

SC 5 - 15th Apr 2020 -SOLN

1D

The first thing to realize is that, we can not use past perfect tense, (whether one or many) without

the accompaniment of a simple past. The later one has to be in simple past

Choice A fouls that norm, by having had confronted and they had. Clearly the latter event is the

Tax Reform Act of 1986 and the correct answer choice has to use the simple past equivalent of the

verb confronted to describe the Act.

Choice B is wrong because, we can not have a dangling past perfect.

C is unidiomatic in that it is not completing the idiom starting with as with another as but switches

over to that.

D fits in well and is the right answer, by using the simple past confronted. You can use did here,

instead of confronted.

E changes the meaning that changes confronted the taxpayers rather than the reverse of it.


Another Analysis

Let’s first understand how can we use the idiom “so…that…”. Let’s take an example here:

He ate so much that he could not move from his place.

This sentence has two clauses:

i. Tom ate so much (Independent Clause)

ii. that he could not move from his place. (Dependent Clause)

Notice that the IC with “so” is presenting the cause and the DC with “that” is presenting the effect.

Why could Tom not move from his place? Tom could not move because he ate a lot of food. So

there is a cause-effect relationship between the two clauses. This cause and effect relationship has

been established by the idiom “so… that…”. Hence, usage of this idiom establishes the cause-effect

relationship.

Now let’s see whether this usage stands true for this idiom in the OG sentence with choice E:

Never before had taxpayers confronted so many changes at once that confronted them the Tax

Reform Act of 1986.

If we analyze this sentence, there is no cause and effect relationship between the two clauses.

Notice that in sentence “that” is functioning as a relative pronoun that is modifying a slightly far


away noun “changes”. However, in the example sentence, “that” is functioning as a conjunction that

connects the cause clause with the effect clause. Hence, the usage of “so… that…” is not correct in

choice E.


2A

Even though Clovis points, spear points with longitudinal grooves chipped onto their faces, have

been round all over north America ,they are named for the new Mexico site where whey were first

discovered in 1932.

The contrast set by the original sentence is that Clovis Points have been found in all over the North

America, but they are named for the New Mexico where they were first discovered in 1932. This

contrast is correct.

So let’s proceed to the PoE now:

A. Even though Clovis points, spear points with longitudinal grooves chipped onto their faces, have

been found all over North America, they are named for the New Mexico site where they were first

discovered in 1932. Correct. No errors.

B. Although named for the New Mexico site where first discovered in 1932, Clovis points are spear

points of longitudinal grooves chipped onto their faces and have been found all over North

America. Incorrect.

Notice the contrast this choice presents. It says although CPs are named for New Mexico site

where…, they are spear points. This is not the intended contrast. The contrast is between where

they have been found and for what they have been named. This sentence presents the contrast that

says they are named for NM site but they look like this.

C. Named for the New Mexico site where they have been first discovered in 1932, Clovis points,

spear points of longitudinal grooves chipped onto the faces, have been found all over North

America. Incorrect.

1. Use of present perfect tense “have been discovered” is incorrect to refer to an action that took

place in 1932.

2. This sentence does not present any contrast.

D. Spear points with longitudinal grooves that are chipped onto the faces, Clovis points, even

though named for the New Mexico site where first discovered in 1932, but were found all over North

America.Incorrect.

1. There is only one verb for "Spear points…”. But still the choice is using “but”. This means there

should be another verb here. Absence of this verb leads to fragment error.

E. While Clovis points are spear points whose faces have longitudinal grooves chipped into them,

they have been found all over North America, and named for the New Mexico site where they have

been first discovered in 1932. Incorrect.


1. Per this sentence, the contrast is that CPs are spear points but they have been found all over the

North America and are named for the NM site. This certainly is not the intended contrast.

Take Away

1. Understand the context of the sentence very well. Carefully notice the contrasts or comparisons

made.

2. Assess if those contrasts or comparisons are logical or not.

3. Once you get the intended logical meaning, do the POE to find out which answer choice conveys

the intended meaning in the best way.


Another Analysis :

EXAMPLE 1 & 2

Both these sentences tell us about the effects of the invention of the steam engine. The invention

happened at a certain point of time in the past that is not mentioned in the sentence. However the

effects of the invention (making our lives easier) are visible in the present context. So, the correct

way to represent this event is by using the present perfect tense. Hence, example 1 is correct.

The simple past tense ‘made’ represents that the invention made our lives easier at a certain point

of time in the past.


EXAMPLE 3 & 4

Both these sentences tell us about an event (the invention of steam engine) that happened in the

18th century. Since it is clearly mentioned in the sentence when the event happened and the

sentence does not talk about the effects of this event, the correct way to represent this event is by

using the simple past tense. So, example 4 is correct.


OFFICIAL QUESTION

From the context of this question, it is clear that Clovis points were first discovered at a certain point

of time in the past: i.e., in 1932. The first discovery itself does not extend into the present. So, the

discovery of the Clovis points is an event that happened in 1932 and hence it should be represented

using the simple past tense (were discovered).

Note that the use of the present perfect tense verb “have been found” is perfectly correct here.

Since the action of finding the Clovis points is a continuous action that started in the past and has

continued over the years, it is represented using the present perfect tense (have been found).


3E


An interesting analysis :

"The Menomini crafted a canoe, which could carry four persons or eight hundred pounds

of baggage..."

Right off the bat, I'm noticing a construction of "could carry X or Y" Our answer choices are all after

"Y" (baggage), so we need to figure out what the purpose is for everything after Y.

The quick answer? Everything after Y needs to be modifying "canoe", but some answer choices

modify "baggage."

prasannar wrote:

(A) From the bark of the paper birch tree the Menomini crafted a canoe about twenty feet long

and two feet wide, with small ribs and rails of cedar, which could carry four persons or eight

hundred pounds of baggage so light that a person could easily portage it around impeding rapids.


I fell for this answer. I misinterpreted the meaning.

"The Menomini crafted a canoe, which could carry four persons or eight hundred pounds of

baggage so light that a person could easily portage it around violent rapids."

I thought that everything after "baggage" was just modifying "baggage." But what would that

mean? The baggage was so light that a person could easily portage it around violent rapid?

Wait a minute, that doesn't make any sense. The person wouldn't be portaging the baggage around

rapids. They would be portaging the canoe around rapids. Therefore we need everything after

baggage to be modifying canoe, not "baggage."

Eliminate based on MEANING.

prasannar wrote:

(B) From the bark of the paper birch tree the Menomini crafted a canoe about twenty feet long

and two feet wide, with small ribs and rails of cedar, which could carry four persons or eight

hundred pounds of baggage being so light that a person could easily portage it around impeding

rapids.


BKimball did a great job explaining the problem with "being." Further, this answer choice makes

the same mistake as (A). Everything after "baggage" would be modifying "baggage" instead of

"canoe."


Eliminate based on MEANING and grammar.

prasannar wrote:

(C) From the bark of the paper birch tree the Menomini crafted a canoe about twenty feet long

and two feet wide, with small ribs and rails of cedar, which could carry four persons or eight

hundred pounds of baggage, yet being so light that a person could easily portage it around

impeding rapids.


Same issue as (B), "being" is wrong here. But since we have a comma after "baggage", I think we

are actually OK from a meaning perspective, everything after "baggage" is referring to "canoe",

which is good. Nonetheless, "being" is not needed.

Eliminate based on grammar.

prasannar wrote:

(D) From the bark of the paper birch tree the Menomini crafted a canoe about twenty feet long

and two feet wide, with small ribs and rails of cedar, which could carry four persons or eight

hundred pounds of baggage, and so light that a person could easily portage it around impeding

rapids.


Yuck. Let's look at our reduced sentence for this answer choice.

"The Menomini crafted a canoe, which could carry four persons or eight hundred pounds

of baggage, and so light that a person could easily portage it around violent rapids."

The "comma + and" is wrong here. If we're going to have a comma + and, I think we need an

independent clause. But we don't have a verb after the comma + and.

Eliminate based on grammar.

prasannar wrote:

(E) From the bark of the paper birch tree the Menomini crafted a canoe about twenty feet long

and two feet wide, with small ribs and rails of cedar, which could carry four persons or eight

hundred pounds of baggage yet was so light that a person could easily portage it around impeding

rapids.


I was unable to eliminate this one, but like I mentioned earlier, I sheepishly still chose (A). But when

we dive into the meaning, this one is the most clear and concise.

The "yet" introduces a contrast.


"The Menomini crafted a canoe, which could carry four persons or eight hundred pounds

of baggage yet was so light that a person could easily portage it around violent rapids.

*Thinking out loud:* So the Menomi crafted a canoe, it could carry X or Y, yet (the canoe) was

so light that a person could portage it around violent rapids.

This makes sense from a meaning perspective. I kind of wish we had a comma before "yet." Maybe

a grammar expert can explain why we don't need a comma?

Regardless, there's nothing clearly wrong with this sentence, and it's the only other answer choice

aside from (C) and (D) that conveys the correct meaning by having the modifier after "baggage"

refer to "canoe."


4E

(A) Having the right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper’s bullet during the First World War

Wrong. "being crippled" is incorrect, because "crippled by a sniper's bullet" modifies "hand

and arm" ==> Verb+ed is correct, not "being Verb+ed".

I don't think "having" is a problem here. For example: having a car towed yesterday, Harry

comes to school late today.

(B) In spite of his right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper’s bullet during the First

World War

Wrong. Same as A. "being crippled" is incorrect modifier.

(C) Because there had been a sniper’s bullet during the First World War that crippled his

right hand and arm

Wrong. "that" seems to modify "first world war". In addition, the structure is very awkward

"there had been.....that crippled.....".

(D) The right hand and arm being crippled by a sniper’s bullet during the First World War

Wrong. Same as A. "being crippled" is incorrect modifier.

(E) His right hand and arm crippled by a sniper’s bullet during the First World War

Correct. "his" refers to Horace Pippin, "crippled" modifies "hand and arm".

5A

More and more in recent years, cities are stressing the arts as a means to greater economic

development and investing millions of dollars in cultural activities, despite strained municipal

budgets and fading federal support.

Let’s analyze each choice on the basis of parallelism.

(A) to greater economic development and investing: Correct. The two entities in the list are “are

stressing” and “(are) investing millions of dollars in cultural activities”.


(B) to greater development economically and investing: Incorrect. “economically” is not the same as

“economic”. “economically” means “inexpensively” whereas “economic” means pertaining to the

finance.

(C) of greater economic development and invest: Incorrect. “invest” is not parallel to “are

stressing”.

(D) of greater development economically and invest: Incorrect. Same errors as in choice C.

(E) for greater economic development and the investment of: Incorrect. This choice distorts the

intended meaning as "are stressing" is not parallel to "the investment...".

The confusion between A and E can be further resolved much easily if we know the correct idiom

pertaining to the use “means”.

The two correct idioms related to “means of” and “means to”.

“means of” = kind of

“means to” = method to achieve

Per the official sentence, the intended meaning is that “arts” is a method to greater economic

development and investing lots of money in cultural activities. On this basis, choice A can be

selected easily.


6 E


Interesting analysis by GMAT Ninja

Quote:

Hi Experts, i have a query can we not eliminate abc on the basis of that as we always use where

when addressing location?


Good question, shalabhg27. I don't think that the GMAT is particularly rigid on this. Sure, if you use

the word "where", it would have to modify a place or location -- but you could use "that" to modify a

location, too.


 The restaurant that serves a Polish buffet is one of Chicago's most legendary eateries.

 Someday, I want to live in a country that has a reasonable health care system.

Both of these seem completely acceptable to me, even though "that" modifies a location in each

case ("restaurant" and "country", respectively). So I wouldn't say that "where" is necessary when

you're modifying a place or location.


Quote:

1 more thing what is the anticident of this predator?

Quote:

In the correct answer option E, the mention is of wolves whereas in the non-underlined portion

the reference to "this predator" seems confusing to me.

This predator is singular and wolves is plural.

Can anybody clarify please?


Ugh -- this part is trickier, and I don't really like what the GMAT has done here. First, you don't

technically need an antecedent for "this predator", since "this predator" isn't a pronoun. But the

singular/plural thing is a little bit funky: the sentence would probably be a little bit better if (E) said

"these predators" (to match the word "wolves") instead of "this predator."

But to be fair, I don't think that the singular/plural issue is all that much of a crime in this case.

Again, "this predator" isn't a pronoun; if "this predator" were changed to "it" in (E), then the answer

choice would be inarguably wrong, since "it" can't refer to "wolves." But since "this predator" isn't a

pronoun, I think the GMAT would argue that there's no ambiguity here: we still easily understand

what, exactly, "this predator" is. Again, I don't love it, but I see their point.

More importantly: remember that the GMAT never asks you to identify a perfect answer choice.

They're asking you to identify the best of the five options. Or the least crappy of the five options. As

plenty of others have suggested, there are more severe problems with the other four answer

choices -- and the little singular/plural issue in (E) is pretty minor by comparison.

No comments:

Post a Comment