Ancient Thailand

[jlucero]

Hi Ron:
I eliminated DE because of ambiguous meaning.
just take D as example.
*Meaning1:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (did) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In this interpretation creating images parallel to constructing and decorating .
*Meaning2:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In the second interpretation, the creative energy parallel to constructing and decorating .

I am not sure whether this faulty parallelism will lead to ambiguous like above. Please correct me if I am wrong.

yours Yama

First off, both of those meanings are incorrect, so if you can find both meanings and realize they don't make sense, you should eliminate them right off the bat.

Secondly, because there is a comma right before the "and", the parallel element is further away in the sentence. This shows up on a decent number of GMAT questions. Here's an example:

I like running laps when no one is at the track and singing loudly.

Normally you wouldn't use a comma to separate two elements, but in this example, the sentence could have two meanings:
I like running laps when no one is (a) at the track and (b) singing loudly).
or
I like (a) running laps when no one is at the track and (b) singing loudly.

By including a comma here before the "and" you ensure the second meaning and make further elements parallel.

I like running laps when no one is at the track, and singing loudly.

That's what you technically have in your example:
creating images of Buddha (a)accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (b) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them

Long story short, neither meaning works!

[ikuta.yamahashi]

Hi Ron:
I eliminated DE because of ambiguous meaning.
just take D as example.
*Meaning1:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (did) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In this interpretation creating images parallel to constructing and decorating .
*Meaning2:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In the second interpretation, the creative energy parallel to constructing and decorating .

I am not sure whether this faulty parallelism will lead to ambiguous like above. Please correct me if I am wrong.

yours Yama

First off, both of those meanings are incorrect, so if you can find both meanings and realize they don't make sense, you should eliminate them right off the bat.

Secondly, because there is a comma right before the "and", the parallel element is further away in the sentence. This shows up on a decent number of GMAT questions. Here's an example:

I like running laps when no one is at the track and singing loudly.

Normally you wouldn't use a comma to separate two elements, but in this example, the sentence could have two meanings:
I like running laps when no one is (a) at the track and (b) singing loudly).
or
I like (a) running laps when no one is at the track and (b) singing loudly.

By including a comma here before the "and" you ensure the second meaning and make further elements parallel.

I like running laps when no one is at the track, and singing loudly.

That's what you technically have in your example:
creating images of Buddha (a)accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (b) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them

Long story short, neither meaning works!

Great explanation, Thank you jlucero!

[tim]

:)

[soulwangh]

Hi Ron:
I eliminated DE because of ambiguous meaning.
just take D as example.
*Meaning1:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (did) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In this interpretation creating images parallel to constructing and decorating .
*Meaning2:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In the second interpretation, the creative energy parallel to constructing and decorating .

I am not sure whether this faulty parallelism will lead to ambiguous like above. Please correct me if I am wrong.

yours Yama

First off, both of those meanings are incorrect, so if you can find both meanings and realize they don't make sense, you should eliminate them right off the bat.

Secondly, because there is a comma right before the "and", the parallel element is further away in the sentence. This shows up on a decent number of GMAT questions. Here's an example:

I like running laps when no one is at the track and singing loudly.

Normally you wouldn't use a comma to separate two elements, but in this example, the sentence could have two meanings:
I like running laps when no one is (a) at the track and (b) singing loudly).
or
I like (a) running laps when no one is at the track and (b) singing loudly.

By including a comma here before the "and" you ensure the second meaning and make further elements parallel.

I like running laps when no one is at the track, and singing loudly.

That's what you technically have in your example:
creating images of Buddha (a)accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (b) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them

Long story short, neither meaning works!

Sorry， I don't understand the reply of the teacher.
1//
Did he mean there is no Meaning2 as follows because the usage of the comma?

creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In the second interpretation, the creative energy parallel to constructing and decorating

2//
Why did the teacher say both meaning was not right?
I think meaning1 is the intent meaning.
3//
IMO, this choice is wrong because there are a verb and a object between what the writer wants to parallel, making parallel parts stay too far away from each other.

Please correct my view.

Thanks.

[jingjiaol257]

Hi Ron:
I eliminated DE because of ambiguous meaning.
just take D as example.
*Meaning1:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (did) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In this interpretation creating images parallel to constructing and decorating .
*Meaning2:
creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them
In the second interpretation, the creative energy parallel to constructing and decorating .

I am not sure whether this faulty parallelism will lead to ambiguous like above. Please correct me if I am wrong.

yours Yama

First off, both of those meanings are incorrect, so if you can find both meanings and realize they don't make sense, you should eliminate them right off the bat.

Secondly, because there is a comma right before the "and", the parallel element is further away in the sentence. This shows up on a decent number of GMAT questions. Here's an example:

I like running laps when no one is at the track and singing loudly.

Normally you wouldn't use a comma to separate two elements, but in this example, the sentence could have two meanings:
I like running laps when no one is (a) at the track and (b) singing loudly).
or
I like (a) running laps when no one is at the track and (b) singing loudly.

By including a comma here before the "and" you ensure the second meaning and make further elements parallel.

I like running laps when no one is at the track, and singing loudly.

That's what you technically have in your example:
creating images of Buddha (a)accounted for much of the local artisans’ creative energy, and also (b) constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them

Long story short, neither meaning works!

hi instructor
I can't understand your reply well.
why you said both the two meanings are wrong.
In my opinion, meaning 1 is the just the meaning we need.That is, can you tell me what is the difference between meanings 1 and correct choice B?
Thanks!!

[RonPurewal]

The problem is that the construction suggests meaning #2. The intended meaning is clearly #1, but the sentence is built in a way that's antithetical to meaning #1.

E.g.,
If I told you
Animal X eats animal Y(,) and also animal Z
... then I'd bet lots of money that your immediate interpretation would be "Animal X is a predator that preys on animals Y and Z".

In fact, the thought that this sentence might be "ambiguous" probably wouldn't even occur to you.

[S.agar]

Hi Ron,

One thing, I wanted to clarify.

As you said, the non-possessive pronoun can not be used for a possessive noun, however in the correct answer 'they' is referring to 'Buddha images' which is in possessive form (the main noun is 'creation of buddha images').

Please let me know, what is wrong with my understanding.

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

• note the part where i tell you to ignore this "rule", which is basically nothing but trouble.
– LOTS of people misunderstand this "rule".
– if you misunderstand this "rule", it will cost you problems.
– there is ZERO benefit in understanding it. (it has never been the basis for an official problem... ever. and that's a good thing, because it's not a generally accepted principle of english anyway.)

so, yeah, ignore it.

[RonPurewal]

in response to your question, that's not a "possessive".
possessives are things of the form "___'s" (or equivalent pronouns—his, her, my, etc.)

but, yeah, this is not something you should be thinking about in the first place.

[SudhanshuK453]

Is the phrase "The temple in which" correct? I dont think so and that is why I crossed out B.

My understanding is that "in which" is a relative pronoun that can only be used for situations/arrangement. E.g., The arrangement in which I win the house

For physical locations, such as a temple, we should use 'where'

What am I missing here? Please explain when should we use the relative pronouns 'in which' and 'where' respectively?

[RonPurewal]

nah.
'X, in which...' is just a flipped version of '...in X'. whenever you can write 'in X', you can also use 'in which...' to modify 'X'.

maybe a physical location:
I placed my keys in the box.
...so, that box is the box in which I placed my keys.

maybe not:
Sarah first gained experience in an unpaid internship.
...so, that job was the internship in which Sarah first gained experience.

this matter is totally independent of whether you can use 'where'.
maybe you can use both.
maybe one but not the other.
maybe neither.

[RonPurewal]

Is the phrase "The temple in which" correct? I dont think so and that is why I crossed out B.

My understanding is that "in which" is a relative pronoun that can only be used for situations/arrangement. E.g., The arrangement in which I win the house

For physical locations, such as a temple, we should use 'where'

What am I missing here? Please explain when should we use the relative pronouns 'in which' and 'where' respectively?

^^ also, it's possible that you are falling prey to one of the most pernicious kinds of bad logic out there—namely, 'if thing A is right, then thing B must be wrong.'

that's not how the world works, especially not when it comes to writing. there are lots of different ways to write stuff—so many ways, in fact, that each and every author has a distinct style of his or her own!

the point is this:
most constructions are not in competition with each other. NEVER assume that 2 things are mutually exclusive, unless there is a rock-solid logical basis for assuming such a thing.

[RonPurewal]

––NOTHNG IN THIS POST IS RELEVANT TO THE GMAT EXAM––

...also, technically, 'in which' is more specific than 'where'.

e.g.,

...the temples in which XXXX are enshrined...
--> the shrines are actually INSIDE the temples.

...the temples where XXXX are enshrined...
--> the shrines are somewhere on the temple grounds, but not necessarily inside. they could be inside—but they could also be in the temple gardens, or on the outside walls, or just about anywhere else on the temples' physical property.

again, NOTHNG IN THIS POST IS RELEVANT TO THE GMAT EXAM. (when the exam tests differences in meaning, they will be HUGE differences in meaning.)
...but, still, it's fun to think about.
...and it's something you should be able to figure out yourself. no memorization is required (or even helpful) here; you just have to think carefully about what the words 'in' and 'where' mean.

[DiJ92]

Dear RON,


in choic d, and e.
for example, in C
the latter part of the sentence" constructing and decoration of ..." can express an omitted constrution?: Creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisan's creative energy as well as constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them ( did). Or it only can be understand in this way "as well as" connects "the much of the local artisan's creative energy" with "constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them". Also, is there meaning difference between "as well as“ and ”and“/

thanks a lot

[RonPurewal]

Dear RON,


in choic d, and e.
for example, in C
the latter part of the sentence" constructing and decoration of ..." can express an omitted constrution?: Creating images of Buddha accounted for much of the local artisan's creative energy as well as constructing and decorating the temples enshrining them ( did).

i find it interesting that you've changed a non-parallel construction into a parallel construction.

in any case, this is a non-issue.
in any context like this one, there WILL be an answer choice that puts the parallel things closer together. so that version will be a winner, and this one will be a loser.