Pronoun Issues

[stevefeiner5]

In Japan, a government advisory committee called for the breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the largest telephone company in the world, so it would be two local phone companies and one long-distance provider.

A. In Japan, a government advisory committee called for the breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the largest telephone company in the world, so it would be
B. The breakup of the world's largest telephone company, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, was called for by a government advisory committee in Japan, so it would be
C. A government advisory committee in Japan called for the breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the world's largest telephone company, into
D. The breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the world's largest telephone company, was called for by a government advisory committee in Japan, so it would be
E. Called for by a government advisory committee, the breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company in Japan, the world's largest telephone company, was to be into



Question taking from the GMATprep, I was able to deduce the answer but a lot of reasons were awkward or possible pronoun ambiguity and wanted some concrete reasons for the answers.

Thanks,

Steve

[tim]

Tell us a little about the issues you were able to identify and what specific progress you've made, and we'll be glad to help you the rest of the way!

[babbar.gauravstar]

D. The breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the world's largest telephone company,

Is this construction correct? Mu doubt is whether 'the world's largest telephone company' is referring to breakup or Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company?

Please explain.

Thanks
Gaurav

[RonPurewal]

D. The breakup of Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company, the world's largest telephone company,

Is this construction correct? Mu doubt is whether 'the world's largest telephone company' is referring to breakup or Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company?

Please explain.

Thanks
Gaurav

that particular construction should be ok, yes. that is an example of an "appositive modifier" -- a modifier that consists of a noun or noun phrase immediately following a comma.
such appositive modifiers usually modify the immediately preceding noun, although there are notable exceptions when the appositive noun itself is an abstract noun.
see here:
post35386.html#p35386

however, the appositive in this case is definitely not abstract ("the world's largest telephone company" is certainly a concrete thing), so it can certainly be taken to refer to the immediately preceding noun. in fact, that's the preferred usage.

that choice has other issues, though ("so it would be" has a confusingly ambiguous pronoun and also doesn't make sense in terms of verb tense).

[rx_11]

Dear MGMAT instructors,

I have no idea why ABDE is wrong in this question. Can you explain it?

rx.

[tim]

In ABD, "so" is used as a coordinating conjunction, joining two independent clauses. However, the second half of the sentence is clearly dependent on the first half, so a conjunction of this type is inappropriate. As for E, there is a problem with the word "be", but the more obvious problem is that it sounds like Japan is the world's largest telephone company..

[hiphopdidi7623]

In choice A, is the pronoun "it" ambigious?

[RonPurewal]

In choice A, is the pronoun "it" ambigious?

technically yes, but, that sort of pronoun ambiguity is not a criterion on which you can eliminate; there are many, many officially correct sentences with technically ambiguous pronouns like that one.

read more here:
post40400.html#p40400

[nnayar]

Sorry for bumping an old thread-

IN this questions- choices B, D and E have a passive construction- is that not a valid reason to cross them off as incorrect?

[messi10]

Hi nnayar,

Do not cross off answer choices based on that criteria alone. Passive choices are not always wrong and even preferred at times.

Regards

Sunil

[jnelson0612]

Hi nnayar,

Do not cross off answer choices based on that criteria alone. Passive choices are not always wrong and even preferred at times.

Regards

Sunil

Indeed. As I recall, Ron analyzed this issue by looking at the OG and found that passive construction was correct about as often as active construction, usually because many answer choices with passive construction otherwise contain the correct grammar.

[biswarup.roychowdhury]

Hi

Can anyone pls let know whether a,b,d & e all are wrong because 'it' is used to refer plural 'two local phone companies and one long-distance provider'.
In place of 'it' we should say 'there would be two local phone companies and one long-distance provider. '

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Hi

Can anyone pls let know whether a,b,d & e all are wrong because 'it' is used to refer plural 'two local phone companies and one long-distance provider'.

"it" actually refers to "Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company" in these instances, although these constructions are still wrong because they don't convey the right meaning.
the intended meaning is that the Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company would be broken up into these entities, so the presence of the word "into" is important.

In place of 'it' we should say 'there would be two local phone companies and one long-distance provider."

this is not much better; it still fails to convey the meaning that these entities were actually going to be created by the breakup of the Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company.
if the wording is just "there would be ...", it seems to suggest that the Nippon company would simply be disbanded, and that these entities would arise on their own to take its place -- or that these entities already existed, and would be the only remaining companies in the field after the Nippon company was disbanded.

[jp.jprasanna]

Hi

Can anyone pls let know whether a,b,d & e all are wrong because 'it' is used to refer plural 'two local phone companies and one long-distance provider'.

"it" actually refers to "Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company" in these instances, although these constructions are still wrong because they don't convey the right meaning.
the intended meaning is that the Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company would be broken up into these entities, so the presence of the word "into" is important.

In place of 'it' we should say 'there would be two local phone companies and one long-distance provider."

this is not much better; it still fails to convey the meaning that these entities were actually going to be created by the breakup of the Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company.
if the wording is just "there would be ...", it seems to suggest that the Nippon company would simply be disbanded, and that these entities would arise on their own to take its place -- or that these entities already existed, and would be the only remaining companies in the field after the Nippon company was disbanded.

hi -

I see Why E is wrong also I understand the correct answer

But in A , B and D

IT is not very ambiguous as "it" here has to refer to "Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company" from the context.
Also apart from the reason that is mentioned above by Ron is there any other reason(s) to eliminate A,B and D?

Cheers

[RonPurewal]

IT is not very ambiguous as "it" here has to refer to "Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Company" from the context.
Also apart from the reason that is mentioned above by Ron is there any other reason(s) to eliminate A,B and D?

Cheers

jp, read that post again. the problem isn't pronoun ambiguity; it's that the meaning generated by that pronoun is nonsense.
it's impossible for one company to be two companies; the sentence must say that one company is going to be broken into two companies (or that two companies are going to be created from one company, etc.)