Because there are provisions.....

[StaceyKoprince]

Which subject are you talking about? There are two subject-verb pairs: "there are provisions" and "tiny islets can be."

Ambiguity. :)

Also, in general, we need to meet two criterion: structure and logic. It is true that we typically expect a subject pronoun of a subordinate clause to refer to the subject of the main clause - that's the structural expectation - but I also have to pay attention to logic. If there's a noun that makes sense logically and a different noun that meets the structural expectation, that's also ambiguous.

Finally, sometimes they will say that's something's ambiguous (and therefore eliminate in one problem) and sometimes they will say something's right when it seems to be ambiguous in the same way that it was ambiguous (and wrong) in some other problem. Annoying - they're not even 100% consistent in their own stuff.

So don't drive yourself crazy. In general, if you've got a split between a pronoun and the actual noun (that is, the answer choice removes the pronoun and puts the real noun in its place), and you think there's ambiguity, fine - choose one of the answers with the real noun instead of the pronoun.

But if the answer choices don't offer you the option of replacing the pronoun with a real noun, then don't agonize over ambiguity of a pronoun. Go deal with everything else that you know and, if necessary, make a guess.

Finally, no, it is not true that the pronoun and the noun have to be in the same case. They can be in different cases. So not a good rule to use. :)

[kurtw550]

Do comma + ing modifiers have to be "connected" to the clause that they modify or can they "jump" over any words or clauses?

For example: Question number 55 from the OG12.
Many house builders offer rent-to-buy programs, which enables a family with insufficient savings for a conventional down payment to move into a new housing, applying part of the rent to a purchase later.

Could "applying" jump over the non-essential phrase starting with "which", if it made sense, and modify the clause "Many house builders offer".

Thank you for your help

[agarwalmanoj2000]

IMO comma + ing modifiers need not be "connected" to the clause they modify. They can "jump" over non-essential modifier, but not any words or clauses.

Example:
Last year, out of business capital he bought a luxurious car, latest model of BMW, resulting in business loss.

HTH.

[aps_asks]

Hi Instructors ,

Why is Choice A ) an inferior choice Vis a Vis the correct answer ?

i feel it is because of they ( Which is ambiguous ) ...It can refer to provisions , islets or fisheries...

Meaning is also an issue....Since maritime code and not its provisions have stimulated international disputes...

What else...

Meaning issues are usually difficult to decipher during test....And GMAT does not decide correct answer choice based on Pronoun ambiguity alone........


Please let me know your comments...

[RonPurewal]

(a) is redundant (provisions ... provide).

[aps_asks]

Thanks !

[tim]

:)

[classifiedsbakken]

I had gone through the post, Because even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large areas under provisions of the new maritime code. Please produce some more attachments about the topic for view detail information.

[spam deleted]

[tim]

keep your spam off our boards!

[joindk]

I m stuck between B and D.

choice (d) uses "this" as a standalone pronoun. that's pretty much never acceptable in a formal written sentence.

if you're going to use "this", you should use it as an adjective: this thing, this finding, this statistic, etc.

--

also, here's some "extra credit" knowledge:
there ARE constructions that can stand for the abstract information in an entire clause (unlike pronouns, which are limited to standing for actual nouns). chief among these are the COMMA + NOUN modifiers.
however, the presence of "because" at the beginning of choice (d) would preclude the use of those modifiers as well.

here's an example:
studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, a finding that has shocked most observers.
studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y; this finding has shocked most observers.
--> both correct. note that "a finding", following the comma, or "this finding", standing alone after the semicolon, stands for the entirety of the clause that comes before it; you couldn't use "which" here, because "which" would automatically refer to Y.

because studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, this finding has shocked most observers.
--> incorrect. the presence of "because" at the beginning of the first clause means you can't use "this finding" anymore.
i don't have any idea what the actual rule is here, but i do know with 100% certainty that these constructions are allowed and disallowed respectively.

Hi Ron,

In the first example, you are referring to 'Absolute phrase'. Are you?

'a finding' = noun, 'that...' = noun modifier , total = absolute phrase.

[thanghnvn]

When I read A, I see it wordy.
When I read B, I see that A is wordy and different from B in meaning.

Both meanings in A and B are correct. forget the wordiness of A, Why do we think that meaning in B is intended meaning.

Though, I choose the meaning in B and consider the meaning in B the intended meaning, I do not understand why I do so.

if we forget the wordiness of A, we see that the meaning in A and B are different. But why we consider the meaning in B the intended meaning. Pls, explain this process.

Most of the question in og make us choose between 2 meanings in 2 choices which are correct grammatially and even logically. One meaing is not considered the intended meaning and so is considered the distorted meaning. We normally find out the intended meaning by understanding the meaning of the stem of the original sentence.

This process make us troubles.

pls, explain more of how to identify the intended meaning when we face 2 meanings in 2 answer choices which are correct grammatically and logically. Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

thanghnvn, that's a non-issue in this problem, because the use of both "provisions" and "provide" is redundant.

no question will ever have two legitimately correct answers. if you do come across a question on which there are two grammatically sound options, there will be some sort of problem with the meaning of one of them. (you may have to use common sense to discern which meaning is correct, but the use of common sense on the gmat is certainly not unfamiliar -- it's a ubiquitous feature of the critical reasoning section, for instance.)

[thanghnvn]

thanghnvn, that's a non-issue in this problem, because the use of both "provisions" and "provide" is redundant.

no question will ever have two legitimately correct answers. if you do come across a question on which there are two grammatically sound options, there will be some sort of problem with the meaning of one of them. (you may have to use common sense to discern which meaning is correct, but the use of common sense on the gmat is certainly not unfamiliar -- it's a ubiquitous feature of the critical reasoning section, for instance.)

Thank you, Ron, your posting is great. But I want you to write more of " discern which meaning is correct"

gmat SC now focus more on meaning. This focus means we willl more face 2 grammartically correct choices one of which has meaning problem. So, the use of common sense to discern which meaning is correct will be the key to success on SC. But, most prep books do not seem focus on the process of discerning the correct meaning when you face 2 meanings in 2 grammatically correct choices.

This focus also means that gmat SC dose not test hard points of grammar. Gmat SC want a good communicator who can convey the intended meaning, not distorted meaning. Gmat SC dose not want a good grammarian.

pls,comment on my idea. Thank you.

[georgepaul0071987]

I m stuck between B and D.

choice (d) uses "this" as a standalone pronoun. that's pretty much never acceptable in a formal written sentence.

if you're going to use "this", you should use it as an adjective: this thing, this finding, this statistic, etc.

--

also, here's some "extra credit" knowledge:
there ARE constructions that can stand for the abstract information in an entire clause (unlike pronouns, which are limited to standing for actual nouns). chief among these are the COMMA + NOUN modifiers.
however, the presence of "because" at the beginning of choice (d) would preclude the use of those modifiers as well.

here's an example:
studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, a finding that has shocked most observers.
studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y; this finding has shocked most observers.
--> both correct. note that "a finding", following the comma, or "this finding", standing alone after the semicolon, stands for the entirety of the clause that comes before it; you couldn't use "which" here, because "which" would automatically refer to Y.

because studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y, this finding has shocked most observers.
--> incorrect. the presence of "because" at the beginning of the first clause means you can't use "this finding" anymore.
i don't have any idea what the actual rule is here, but i do know with 100% certainty that these constructions are allowed and disallowed respectively.

I've never read this rule anywhere else .

Because studies have shown that X is 60 percent of Y , this finding has shocked most observers

Is there any other case in which a usage like 'this finding' is incorrect ? ( other than when you use it with 'because' )

[tim]

"this finding" is applicable anytime there is a finding that has been referenced elsewhere in the sentence. this isn't a special rule you need to know; it's just how pronouns work..