 |
| Author |
Message |
|
prashantb03
|
Post subject: GMATPrep  Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 8:19 am |
|
 |
| Students |
|
|
Posts: 4
|
|
Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `
A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years
Why C and Not B?
How does exclusion of "it" help
|
|
  |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 6:50 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
prashantb03 wrote: Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `
A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years
Why C and Not B?
How does exclusion of "it" help since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure. in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".) so, this is all you have to look at: the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it").
|
|
| |
|
|
|
rohit21384
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 12:26 pm |
|
Posts: 54
|
RonPurewal wrote: prashantb03 wrote: Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `
A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years
Why C and Not B?
How does exclusion of "it" help since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure. in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".) so, this is all you have to look at: the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it"). Ron Please explain the structure of the last part.I am not able to comprehend it. " the army of terra cotta warrier took 700,000 artisans more than 35 years to complete. " Can you please make it clear using examples. Are both (1) 700000 artisans and (2) more than 36 years - objects of the verb "took" where 1st one is the indirect object of took and 2nd one is direct object. and is it similar to The project took them several years to complete Thanks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sandeep.19+mg
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 2:33 am |
|
|
| Forum Guests |
|
|
Posts: 3
|
|
B should be the correct answer as the following construct is wrong
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
it should be
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and IT took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
or rather
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete IT
What do you think Ron?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:21 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
sandeep.19+mg wrote: B should be the correct answer as the following construct is wrong
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
it should be
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and IT took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
or rather
... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete IT
What do you think Ron? number one: this is a GMATPREP question. if the correct answer is (c), then the correct answer is (c). * trying to question the correct answer, and say that some other answer should be correct: COMPLETE WASTE OF YOUR TIME * trying to understand why the correct answer is correct, and why the incorrect answers are wrong: PROPER STUDY TECHNIQUE -- number two: you don't need to repeat "it", since the army is already the subject. for instance: I took my bag and went home.same deal here - "I" is already the subject of both verbs, by default. there's no need to say "...and I went home", a construction that would actually detract from the compactness of the sentence.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:21 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
rohit21384 wrote: RonPurewal wrote: prashantb03 wrote: Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `
A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years
Why C and Not B?
How does exclusion of "it" help since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure. in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".) so, this is all you have to look at: the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it"). Ron Please explain the structure of the last part.I am not able to comprehend it. " the army of terra cotta warrier took 700,000 artisans more than 35 years to complete. " Can you please make it clear using examples. Are both (1) 700000 artisans and (2) more than 36 years - objects of the verb "took" where 1st one is the indirect object of took and 2nd one is direct object. and is it similar to The project took them several years to complete Thanks your last analogy is completely 100% correct.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cyprus
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2011 2:14 am |
|
|
| Forum Guests |
|
|
Posts: 5
|
|
Hi Ron,
the starting present participial phrase - 'Rivaling the pyramids... as an achievement' - what kind of a modifier is this? Since it is a present participle with a comma, can we assume it modifies both the verb subject and the verb (hence a verb modifier), and therefore, it need not necessarily touch 'the army of terra-cotta warriors'? I'm only wondering how to eliminate the answer choices in first look (considering reading every answer choice in this question will surely take beyond 1m15s).
Many thanks!
DS
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:31 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
dsweatha wrote: Hi Ron,
the starting present participial phrase - 'Rivaling the pyramids... as an achievement' - what kind of a modifier is this? Since it is a present participle with a comma, that kind of modifier must be followed immediately by the correct subject. Quote: I'm only wondering how to eliminate the answer choices in first look considering that neither the modifier nor the following subject is underlined, i don't see how this modifier will help you eliminate anything. Quote: (considering reading every answer choice in this question will surely take beyond 1m15s). i certainly hope you don't think that you have to take exactly the same amount of time on every SC problem. you can allow more time for longer problems -- and you should allow less time for shorter problems.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
evv89
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:08 pm |
|
|
| Course Students |
|
|
Posts: 6
|
|
Hi everyone!
The question: "in his afterlife" pronoun HIS refers to the army?
Thanks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: GMATPrep Posted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:58 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
evv89 wrote: Hi everyone!
The question: "in his afterlife" pronoun HIS refers to the army?
Thanks no. first, that interpretation makes no sense. second, it's ungrammatical -- “army” would have to be represented by it/its, not he/his. the pronoun stands for “Qin Shi Huang”.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
|
|
