The first trenches..

[RonPurewal]

Ron,

Please assert the explanation below :

The sentence in question addresses a reporting by the author of the analysis of the analysts,which is "according to some analysts....",so we need to observe the rule for reporting verbs here.
The rule is "after any reporting verb "THAT" must be used;even in case of parallel clauses that should be used before every parallel clause."
Hence,I think usage of "THAT" is correct here.

Cheers,
Rohan

i'm sorry; i don't understand.

which verb are you identifying as a "reporting verb"? (there is no verb in the phrase "according to some analysts".)

which "that"?

[RonPurewal]

But there is no verb before cut, it should be passive tense.

in which choice?

in (e), "cut" is not a verb at all; it's a past participle, like "driven", "given", etc.
this is a modifier (describing trenches), not a verb.

[satishchandra.aily]

I have not understood this part of answer choice 'E"

"arose simultaneously with but" what does it modify?

If the answer is complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East, then shouldn't the verb be arising or arisen instead of arose?. "arose" is just past from of arise

I read somewhere in Mgmat forums that all modifying clauses should be with either present participle or past participle verbs.

I checked in dictionary

Arise(presnt), Arose(Past), Arisen(Past participle)




Please explain.

[RonPurewal]

I have not understood this part of answer choice 'E"

"arose simultaneously with but" what does it modify?

that's not a modifier; that's a verb whose subject is "centrally administered complex societies".

in this case, "that" introduces an entire clause, with a subject, verb, and everything, as a modifier of the word "evidence".

If the answer is complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East, then shouldn't the verb be arising or arisen instead of arose?. "arose" is just past from of arise

those forms are not verbs; they are participles. (participles are derived from verbs, but they are definitely not verbs.)

participles serve as modifiers, while verbs serve as ... verbs. therefore, it's actually impossible for both of them to work in a given situation. if the situation requires a verb, then the verb will be correct and the participle will be wrong; if the situation requires a modifier, then it's the other way around.

I read somewhere in Mgmat forums that all modifying clauses should be with either present participle or past participle verbs.

well, technically, if you have a participial modifier, it's not actually a clause; a clause is something that actually has a subject and a verb. so, unless this terminology was used incorrectly in the post that you read, i don't think you are remembering the forum post correctly.
do you have a link to the post?

[MohitJoshi]

"have yielded strong evidence for
centrally administered complex societies in northern
regions of the Middle East that were arising
simultaneously with but"

I understand that above mentioned THAT in this sentence should modify complex societies but seems to be modifying Middle east here and is therefore wrong.

However, in
"............assumption
that lying produces emotional reactions in an individual
that, in turn, create unconscious physiological
responses."

In the above case THAT modifies reactions. This is correct.

Also Manhattan guide states that in case when mission critical modifier falls in between, THAT can be distant from word in modifies.

My question is just as in second question THAT modifies reactions should THAT in first question not modify complex societies? In both cases only a small prepositional phrase falls in between which looks mission critical.

[RonPurewal]

My question is just as in second question THAT modifies reactions should THAT in first question not modify complex societies? In both cases only a small prepositional phrase falls in between which looks mission critical.

yeah, there's no problem with "that" in choice (a).

the problems in choice (a) are ...

* "were arising" -- this tense doesn't make sense. this is an isolated historical event, so it should be expressed in the simple past ("arose").
this tense (i don't know what it's called) is used to describe something that was going on when something else happened. e.g., I was sleeping when the phone rang.

* "evidence for" -- this is used for some argument or position, not for some thing that once existed.
for instance, "evidence for the atkins diet" would be evidence showing that the atkins diet is a good thing.
in this case, you could say evidence OF complex societies (= evidence that they existed); however, FOR is nonsense, because we aren't talking about a position that can be substantiated.

[Kedar]

Hello Ron, Manhttan Staffers,

Being an MG student, I had an oppurtunity going through the foundation book. I have re-arranged my mind to read sentences differently now. :) In that, I probably have lost the track here.
Isn't "that" suppose to refer to a singular idea/thing?

Q1) Is usage of that appropriate here ? And why?

The first trenches--- that ----were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar,

Shouldn't it be "those" instead of "that", since trenches - the subject is plural? That & were - how do they go along?!!!!!

Q2) Shouldn't it be "those" here, instead of "that"?
If it represents a feeling /noun, then that should follow singular very - is/was ----
"Egypt, have yielded strong evidence for blah blah societies in blah blah ?"that"? were arising simultaneously ....


Q3)
What does prounoun "that" refer to?
Soceities right? (not the middle east)
Then shouldn't it be plural - those??

"Egypt, have yielded strong evidence for blah blah societies in blah blah ?"that"? were arising simultaneously ....

Much appreciate your help !

Kedar

[RonPurewal]

kedar, you are confusing two very different kinds of "that".
when you study a word with multiple uses (such as "that"), don't apply rules for the wrong type of usage!

i don't know the grammatical names for these things, but i will show you the two things you are confusing here.

1/
if "THAT" is used to start a modifier (as it is here), then it works with both singular and plural nouns.
both correct:
The key that opens the main door is on the table.
The keys that open the office doors are on the table.

2/
if "THAT" is a pronoun appearing in a parallel structure, then it must represent a singular noun.
The economy of country X is stronger than that of country Y --> correct
The governmental institutions of country X are stronger than that of country Y --> INCORRECT (must be "those")

the problem here is that you are trying to apply the rules for #2 when this case is in fact #1.

[Kedar]

Thanks Ron !

You are the Guru :)

To give this a perfect close, 2 quick checks -
1) that vs which
Is this right? (my suggestion for correct/incorrect)
[Incorrect] I am staying at various hotels, which Paris Hilton operates.
[Correct] I am staying at various hotels that paris hilton operates.

2) This also clears a popluar belief, which I had observed in few other forums. I had seen folks discussing, as in,
"that" cannot be immediately placed after the subject ...to again refer back to the same subject.

I don't think that's true. You can very well use [that] after the subject. Am I right?

The hand that rocks the cradle...

Thanks again, in advance !
(btway just realized few grammer & parallel structure errors in my original post. Corrected them now, hopefully ! It's always good to self review your own stuff, with eye for grammer. To all, please feel free to point me to my grammer errors !)

[RonPurewal]

Thanks Ron !

You are the Guru :)

thanks.

To give this a perfect close, 2 quick checks -
1) that vs which
Is this right? (my suggestion for correct/incorrect)
[Incorrect] I am staying at various hotels, which Paris Hilton operates.
[Correct] I am staying at various hotels that paris hilton operates.

hmmm ... i'm not seeing the connection to the problem in this thread, so let's kill this discussion.

your judgments here are correct, but it's impossible to tell whether you've made those judgments for the right reasons.
if you think this decision has anything to do with grammar, then you're incorrect. on the other hand, if you understand the meaning difference between "which" and "that" -- and how it applies to the situation here -- then good.

i have never seen this particular difference tested on the gmat, so it shouldn't be discussed in this thread. (you can always create a post in the General Verbal folder if you want to discuss it further.)

2) This also clears a popluar belief, which I had observed in few other forums. I had seen folks discussing, as in,
"that" cannot be immediately placed after the subject ...to again refer back to the same subject.

that is one of the wrongest things i've ever seen. who was saying this? where would they get such a strange idea?

I don't think that's true. You can very well use [that] after the subject. Am I right?

The hand that rocks the cradle...

yeah.

subjects aren't "special" when it comes to modifiers. if a modifier can modify a noun, then it makes no difference whether that noun is the subject of a verb.

Thanks again, in advance !
(btway just realized few grammer & parallel structure errors in my original post. Corrected them now, hopefully ! It's always good to self review your own stuff, with eye for grammer. To all, please feel free to point me to my grammer errors !)

well, you should probably spell "grammar" correctly. (:

as long as your posts convey your points/questions clearly, you are fine. remember that fixing sentences isn't a skill that is relevant to GMAT SC.

[loma.desai]

Hi,

I often get confused when present and past tense verbs comes together in same sentence. Here "have yielded" is present perfect and "arose" is simple past. Past and presnt tense verbs can never come together in same sentence then why is option E correct?

Loma

[jlucero]

Hi,

I often get confused when present and past tense verbs comes together in same sentence. Here "have yielded" is present perfect and "arose" is simple past. Past and presnt tense verbs can never come together in same sentence then why is option E correct?

Loma

Because they refer to different nouns in the sentence. Here's the core of the sentence:

The trenches have yielded evidence that societies arose.

The trenches have been doing something (present perfect) but the societies arose in the past).

Studying for the GMAT has led me to believe (present perfect) that the test creators were (past) evil. :)

[vijay19839]

Ron
I have confusion on usages of 'THAT' for Subordinate Clause. I see that GMAT explicitly rejects an Option because we don't have THAT before the subordinate clause but in some other question, it says 'THAT' is understood and hence not needed to be explicitly understood.

I am not supposed to put any content from OG12, but i will give a my trimmed down version for these questions.

OG12 Question #7 'As its sales of computer products...'

In the above question my version would be:-

The company is willing to compete for Mass Market sales <THAT> it would in the past have conceded to rivals..

In this question, Experts say 'THAT' is understood and hence need not be explicitly mentioned in the Answer.

OG12 Question #50 - Option D 'According to some analysts, the gains'

Here is my version on Option D:-

Analysts have confidence in the economy to avoid the recession many were fearing earlier in the year.


I know option D is wrong for various other reasons but GMAT explicitly mentions that THAT was needed after the recession. If it thinks THAT here is mandatory then why it doesn't expect the same for the Question#7 above?

Thanks
Vijay

[RonPurewal]

I know option D is wrong for various other reasons but GMAT explicitly mentions that THAT was needed after the recession. If it thinks THAT here is mandatory then why it doesn't expect the same for the Question#7 above?

Thanks
Vijay

this is a very "writerly" distinction. you certainly won't have to use it as the basis for solving any gmat SC problem. (it's one of those things that are mostly intuitive and are reflexively "understood" only by native speakers with significant reading/writing experience.) so, the best you can do here is to realize that some sentences are fine without "that" in this position.

in the problem you've quoted here (thank you for not posting the specifics of the problem), the only choice containing "that" as a rather glaring redundancy (previously + in the past). so, this distinction isn't necessary in solving the problem.

[wangyinwei_2005]

Dear instructors:
can you tell me what's wrong with "having been cut" in option C? why can't we use having+done after a noun.?
please help! thanks in advance!