The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus valley

[Saurabh Malpani]

Source: GMAT Power Prep Test

The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus Valley in the fifth century B.C., bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern India alphabets.

(A) the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and

(B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the

(C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the

(D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and

(E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and

I was torn between C and D can you please disect all the answer choices above!!!

Thanks
Saurabh Malpani

[GMAT 5/18]

I think the answer is A, but I have no sound reasoning as to why. Unfortunately, all I have is "it sounds better than the rest".

To me, both C and D are missing something in between "B.C" and "with it" - I think the "it" makes me feel this way.

The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus valley in the fifth century B.C, with it the Aramaic script.....".

If it read, ".......century B.C, with the Aramaic script.....", that would make more sense. At least to me.

Yes Stacey, please help!

[dbernst]

As Stacey is locked securely in my basement for the evening, it looks like you are stuck with me. First, a reprint of the question:

The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus valley in the fifth century B.C, bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern Indian alphabets.

A) same as above

B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the

C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the

D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and

E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and the

My explanation:

A) "from which" seems to incorrectly refer to the empire (referenced by the pronoun "it") rather than to the script. Also, the singular verb "was derived" does not agree in number with the plural subject "northern and southern Indian alphabets". Finally, the subject "northern and southern Indian alphabets" is unclear: are there several alphabets, or only one of each?

B) "and" creates a lack of connection between the two parts of the sentence. Additionally, "deriving" is an incorrect verb tense.

C) CORRECT. "From which" correctly refers to the script. Additionally, "derive," a plural verb, correctly agrees with the plural subject "the Northern and the Southern Indian alphabets."

D) "derives," a singular verb, does not agree with the plural subject "Northern and Southern Indian alphabets."

E) The second pronoun "it" is ambiguous: does it refer to the "empire" or to the "script"? Additionally, the original intent of the sentence is significantly changed in meaning.

Hope that helps!

[GMAT 5/18]

Ah Dan, thanks again! More evidence that what "sounds" correct to me is more often than not, incorrect.

Awesome explanations!

[Saurabh Malpani]

Hi Dan,

Thank you veyr muc for your response!!! --Can you please help in figuring out the why we should you plural "derive" and not "derives".---If I am not wrong is this is an inverted form of sentence structure?

That will be great help!!

Thanks
Saurabh Malpani

As Stacey is locked securely in my basement for the evening, it looks like you are stuck with me. First, a reprint of the question:

The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus valley in the fifth century B.C, bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and southern Indian alphabets.

A) same as above

B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the

C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the

D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and

E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and the

My explanation:

A) "from which" seems to incorrectly refer to the empire (referenced by the pronoun "it") rather than to the script. Also, the singular verb "was derived" does not agree in number with the plural subject "northern and southern Indian alphabets". Finally, the subject "northern and southern Indian alphabets" is unclear: are there several alphabets, or only one of each?

B) "and" creates a lack of connection between the two parts of the sentence. Additionally, "deriving" is an incorrect verb tense.

C) CORRECT. "From which" correctly refers to the script. Additionally, "derive," a plural verb, correctly agrees with the plural subject "the Northern and the Southern Indian alphabets."

D) "derives," a singular verb, does not agree with the plural subject "Northern and Southern Indian alphabets."

E) The second pronoun "it" is ambiguous: does it refer to the "empire" or to the "script"? Additionally, the original intent of the sentence is significantly changed in meaning.

Hope that helps!

[dbernst]

Saurabh,

You are correct about the "inverted" sentence structure. The simplest approach to diagnosing subject-verb (or verb-subject) agreement is to "start with the verb." What I mean by this is to identify the verb, and then ask the question What? or Who? before the verb.

In this example, the verb in answer choice D is "derives." Thus, ask yourself , "What derives?" According to choice D, "both northern and southern Indian alphabets" derives. This is an obvious S-V agreement error, since we have a plural subject with a singular verb. By using the plural verb "derive," answer choice C corrects this error.

I hope this helps!

-dan

[JadranLee]

Hi Saurabh,

To figure out whether a verb agrees in number (i.e. singular vs. plural) with its subject, you first have to find the subject. The subject of the verb is or are the person(s) or thing(s) doing the action of the verb.

What is the subject of the verb "derive" in the following phrase: "from which derive both the northern and the southern Indian alphabets" ? The subject is "the northern and the southern Indian alphabets", because they are doing the deriving. Since this subject is two things joined by the word "and", it is a plural subject. Therefore, the verb "derive" has to be plural, which it is. ("Derives" would be singular.)

-Jad

[GMAT Fever]

Saurabh,

You are correct about the "inverted" sentence structure. The simplest approach to diagnosing subject-verb (or verb-subject) agreement is to "start with the verb." What I mean by this is to identify the verb, and then ask the question What? or Who? before the verb.

In this example, the verb in answer choice D is "derives." Thus, ask yourself , "What derives?" According to choice D, "both northern and southern Indian alphabets" derives. This is an obvious S-V agreement error, since we have a plural subject with a singular verb. By using the plural verb "derive," answer choice C corrects this error.

I hope this helps!

-dan

In this case (or any other inverted sentence order question for that matter) is there another way to identify the subject? When I asked the question "What derives?" I thought it was the Aramaic script from which was derived the northern and southern indian alphabets. This led me to answer choice D.

Is there another way I can catch this inverted sentence order?

Also "from which" is that same same same as using "which" it refers to the directly proceeding noun?

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

first things first:

Also "from which" is that same same same as using "which" it refers to the directly proceeding noun?

yes.

by the way, the word you want here is 'preceding', not 'proceeding' (look them up in the dictionary if you don't understand the difference).

In this case (or any other inverted sentence order question for that matter) is there another way to identify the subject? When I asked the question "What derives?" I thought it was the Aramaic script from which was derived the northern and southern indian alphabets. This led me to answer choice D.

Is there another way I can catch this inverted sentence order?

the presence of 'from' in front of 'which' disqualifies it from being the subject of 'derive'.
as you figured out above, 'which' refers to the aramaic script. therefore, something had to derive from the aramaic script.
since that something doesn't precede the verb 'derive', it must follow the verb 'derive'. hence, inverted construction.

in general, you're just applying the following well-known rule: the object of a preposition can't be a subject.

[Guest]

[quote="Saurabh Malpani"]Source: GMAT Power Prep Test

The Achaemenid empire of Persia reached the Indus valley in the fifth century B.C, [b][u]bringing the Aramaic script with it, from which was derived both northern and [/u][/b]southern Indian alphabets.

A) same as above

B) the Aramaic script with it, and from which deriving both the northern and the

C) with it the Aramaic script, from which derive both the northern and the

D) with it the Aramaic script, from which derives both northern and

E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and the

I was torn between C and D can you please disect all the answer choices above!!!

Thanks
Saurabh Malpani[/quote]

Hi Dan,
As per the modifier rule, modifier should always touch that is being modifed. In this sentence, (bringing the Aramaic script with it) looks like a modifier and seems to be modifying the empire. But it does not touch empire. Please explain.

Thanks,
--Samrat

[RonPurewal]

As per the modifier rule, modifier should always touch that is being modifed. In this sentence, (bringing the Aramaic script with it) looks like a modifier and seems to be modifying the empire. But it does not touch empire. Please explain.

Thanks,
--Samrat

ah, no, it's not that simple - that rule doesn't apply to ALL modifiers. it applies only to certain classes of modifiers, most notably relative-pronoun modifiers (which, that, who, of which, to whom, etc.) and "-ing" modifiers WITHOUT commas.

if you have an "-ing" modifier WITH a comma, then it doesn't refer to the nearest noun, because, it fact, it doesn't refer to a noun at all. rather, it refers to the entire action of the preceding clause. in this case, that would be "reached the indus valley" - bringing the script modifies THIS action.

for more about this distinction:
look at this post
and
look at the correct answer to SC #71 in the yellow og11; there's a "-ing" modifier WITH comma (doubling), which modifies the entire action of the preceding clause, AND a "-ing" modifier WITHOUT a comma (circling), which just modifies the noun coming directly before it.

hope that helps.

[goelmohit2002]

I got this question in Gprep today....but the option E did not had "the" at the end....

i.e. the option E was:

E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and

so I kicked out the same on the basis of non parallel both X and Y...

X contains "the"...but Y does not contain "the"....

Can someone please tell is there any flaw in my reasoning...

[goelmohit2002]

Finally, the subject "northern and southern Indian alphabets" is unclear: are there several alphabets, or only one of each?

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the awesome explanation.....

Just one small query....

Can you please tell more about the above quoted thing...and how the same is resolved in the correct answer i.e. C.....I could see only one addition in C i.e. "the" wrt to the subject is concerned....

Can you please tell how the addition of "the" resolves the above problem.

Thanks
Mohit

[goelmohit2002]

E) The second pronoun "it" is ambiguous: does it refer to the "empire" or to the "script"?

Hi Dan,

As per Manhattan SC guide 4th edition, in these type of scenarios...the next "it" refers to the noun to which previous "it" refered....

so shouldn't it refer to "empire"...so it should be case of wrong pronoun rather than ambiguous one ?

Thanks
Mohit

[RonPurewal]

I got this question in Gprep today....but the option E did not had "the" at the end....

i.e. the option E was:

E) with it the Aramaic script, and deriving from it both the northern and

so I kicked out the same on the basis of non parallel both X and Y...

X contains "the"...but Y does not contain "the"....

Can someone please tell is there any flaw in my reasoning...

sounds solid to me.