Historians have long debated whether the spectacular

[Aragorn]

Historians have long debated whether the spectacular rise and fall of Napoleon in the decades after the French Revolution was the necessary outcome of the political vacuum having been created by the toppled monarchy.

was the necessary outcome of the political vacuum having been created by the toppled monarchy
was the necessary outcome of the political vacuum created by toppling the monarchy
were the necessary outcomes of the political vacuum that the toppled monarchy created
was the necessary outcome of the political vacuum created from toppling the monarchy
were the necessary outcomes of the political vacuum created by the toppling of the monarchy






I have a doubt in using subjunctive mood. When we use it, singular noun imply plural verb. If I were rich....Is the reverse true? That is in Subjunctive mood, does plural noun implies singular verb?
In choice B, we see it is a debate (not certain outcome), we should use subjunctive mood. So I feel B is correct. Please clarify.
Thanks
.
.
.
.
OA is E

[rfernandez]

Not quite sure what you mean in your question about the subjunctive mood. Would you rephrase it?

The was/were split in the sentence is about subject-verb agreement, not subjunctive mood. The subject here is "rise and fall" so we need a plural verb -- eliminate A, B, and D.

[test009]

i have 2 doubts here:-

1)
how 'rise and fall" is taken as plural. We have "bread and Butter", "fish and curry" etc few words though joined by AND but are treated as singular.
That why i think 'rise and fall" should be treated as singular.
2)
what is Diff between Created By and Created From
Isn't in E, it should be "...created from..."

[Guest]

(A) having been created does not make sense grammatically.
(B) vacuum created by toppling the monarchy. Toppling is used as a participle but it has no clear referent: who is doing the work of toppling.
(C) sounds pretty close. But saying "...vacuum that the toppled monarchy created" may imply that the [toppled] monarchy created the vacuum. In fact, it is not the monarchy, but the toppling of monarchy, that created the vacuum.
(D) A preposition after toppling might improve the sentence.
(E) I prefer it. Here, toppling is the catalyst in rise and fall.

[Maverick]

(A) having been created does not make sense grammatically.
(B) vacuum created by toppling the monarchy. Toppling is used as a participle but it has no clear referent: who is doing the work of toppling.
(C) sounds pretty close. But saying "...vacuum that the toppled monarchy created" may imply that the [toppled] monarchy created the vacuum. In fact, it is not the monarchy, but the toppling of monarchy, that created the vacuum.
(D) A preposition after toppling might improve the sentence.
(E) I prefer it. Here, toppling is the catalyst in rise and fall.

[test009]

can some answer my queries above... ?

Stacey/Ron - Pls advise

[StaceyKoprince]

Were Napoleon's rise and Napolean's fall one outcome or two? Two - a rise is different than a fall, they took place at distinct times, etc.

Be careful with colloquial language. Yes, technically, we can say things like "bread and butter is my favorite meal" but if you say that, you're saying you eat them together, as one thing. If you literally were to eat bread and, once finished with the bread, you then had some butter for dessert, you'd have to make that sentence plural!

Oops, I forgot to address your second question:
The bread and butter sculpture was created by Amy means Amy created the sculpture.
If I wanted to use created from instead, I'd say the sculpture was created from bread and butter. (Not created from Amy, hopefully!) :)

[Aragorn]

Not quite sure what you mean in your question about the subjunctive mood. Would you rephrase it?

The was/were split in the sentence is about subject-verb agreement, not subjunctive mood. The subject here is "rise and fall" so we need a plural verb -- eliminate A, B, and D.

Rey

I did some online reading and found my answer. My question was:
In subjunctive mood, we use a plural verb 'were' for singular pronoun 'I'. So I was aksing, do we use the singular verb 'was' for plural pronoun 'they'...If they was rich, they would buy a house..but one reading of the sentence and I know it is incorrect. It would be ..if they were rich as well.

Thanks

____
Gmat on 12th July :shock:

[Aragorn]

Not quite sure what you mean in your question about the subjunctive mood. Would you rephrase it?

The was/were split in the sentence is about subject-verb agreement, not subjunctive mood. The subject here is "rise and fall" so we need a plural verb -- eliminate A, B, and D.

And I was thinking of subjunctive! Just overlooked the 'and'. Thanks Rey.

PS: I wish I could edit my posts....

[Aragorn]

Dear Staff
And a follow up question...

Historians have long debated whether the spectacular rise of Napoleon in the decades after the French Revolution was/were the necessary outcome of the political vacuum having been created by the toppled monarchy.

Now, as this is singular, but a 'debate', is this subjunctive mood? Do we pick 'were' for subjunctive here?

[DCE]

Hi

Down to C and E but I am not sure why E is better than C ?

Thanks,
DCE

[RonPurewal]

Hi

Down to C and E but I am not sure why E is better than C ?

Thanks,
DCE

stylistic preference.
in formal writing, the NOUN1 VERBed by the NOUN2 is preferred to the NOUN1 that the NOUN2 VERBed. you should memorize this preference, as it is essentially invariant throughout the universe of formal english writing.

there are good reasons for it, most notably that it is easier to parse at first sight, but those reasons are irrelevant: the preference exists, and that's all that really matters.

[ladhamadhukar]

Hi

Down to C and E but I am not sure why E is better than C ?

Thanks,
DCE

stylistic preference.
in formal writing, the NOUN1 VERBed by the NOUN2 is preferred to the NOUN1 that the NOUN2 VERBed. you should memorize this preference, as it is essentially invariant throughout the universe of formal english writing.

there are good reasons for it, most notably that it is easier to parse at first sight, but those reasons are irrelevant: the preference exists, and that's all that really matters.

Thanks for this explanation.
Can you direct me to a few questions that involve this rule either from the OG or from Manhattan? This will help me understand this concept better.

[tim]

As Ron explained, this is not a rule; it is a preference. You’ll find though that making up your own examples (preferably simple ones) for these sorts of constructions is usually better to memorize and take into the GMAT with you than to try to remember an entire question from the OG..

[ivy]

Were Napoleon's rise and Napolean's fall one outcome or two? Two - a rise is different than a fall, they took place at distinct times, etc.

Be careful with colloquial language. Yes, technically, we can say things like "bread and butter is my favorite meal" but if you say that, you're saying you eat them together, as one thing. If you literally were to eat bread and, once finished with the bread, you then had some butter for dessert, you'd have to make that sentence plural!

Oops, I forgot to address your second question:
The bread and butter sculpture was created by Amy means Amy created the sculpture.
If I wanted to use created from instead, I'd say the sculpture was created from bread and butter. (Not created from Amy, hopefully!) :)

Hello Stacey,

Great Explanation! :)

My question:

Option E:
Historians have long debated whether the spectacular rise and fall of Napoleon in the decades after the French Revolution were the necessary outcome of the political vacuum created by the toppling of the monarchy.

Napoleon's rise and Napoleon's fall are two different events. I agree. Then, should not 'the necessary outcome' be replaced by 'the necessary outcomes'? And should not 'the rise and fall' be replaced by 'the rise and the fall' to make the subject unambiguously plural?

I hope to get a reply soon.

Thanks a lot! :)