Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings

[rahul.gmat]

Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.


Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.
Though Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous when viewed from a distance, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.
Saturn's main rings, when viewed from a distance, may appear to be smooth and continuous, though when viewed up close they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.
When viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous, but closer viewing reveals them to be composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.
Though composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets if viewed up close, the main rings of Saturn may appear smooth and continuous when they are viewed from a distance.
The original sentence introduces the main clause with "though viewed from a distance", which establilshes the expectation of a contradiction that never materializes. For example, "Though sleepy, the child stayed awake" is correct, whereas "Though sleepy, the child may have eaten soup" is not. Also, "when viewed up close" is placed in such a way as to illogically suggest that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close. Finally, "appear to be" is redundant.


(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) This choice incorrectly introduces the main clause with "though." Additionally, the placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(C) This choice incorrectly uses the redundant phrase "appears to be." Additionally, the use and placement of the words "when viewed up close, they are . . ." illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(D) CORRECT. This choice replaces "though" with "when" and shortens "appear to be" to "appear." Further, its use of the phrase "closer viewing reveals" clearly indicates that the close viewing only reveals (not causes) the composition of the rings.

(E) This choice incorrectly introduces the main clause with "though." Additionally, the placement of "if viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(B) seems to have a much better parallelism with "when"; (D) seems ungrammatical at least as far as parallelism is concerned. Also, what the harm in starting (B) with "Though", thats correct. Finally, often the reason given in explanations here and in OG says that the meaning communicated is wrong such as here it is mentioned "the placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.
". I never get this. Such problems can often be picked out even in correct answer choices, how does one find such errors.

Can you pls elaborate?[/i]

[dbernst]

Rahul,

Thanks for posting the entire question and answer choices. To save yourself some time, you do not have to also post the explanations for each answer choice. However, if the explanations pertain to your question, by all means include them.

Let me speak broadly first, and then I'll focus on this particular question. Generally, sentence correction questions must be evaluated on two distinct levels: proper grammar and clarity of meaning. Proper grammar definitely trumps clarity of meaning. In other words, if an answer choice contains a provable grammatical error it can NEVER be the correct answer to a sentence correction question. Once certain (or as certain as possible) that no grammatical errors are present, clarity of meaning must be considered. When an answer choice lacks logical sense or diverges too greatly from the intended meaning of the original sentence, it too can frequently be eliminated.

This process of evaluating clarity of meaning is often very difficult for students, since it does not deal with provable errors. In fact, sometimes one is forced to choose between two seemingly imperfect answer choices. When doing so, the skill is to choose the "less bad" answer (I like to call it "the cream of the crap" :))

In the problem at hand, answer choice (B), though parallel (I agree with you that the use of though is fine in this choice), lacks logical sense. By stating they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close, the answer choice is indicating that the composition of Saturn's rings literally changes when the rings are viewed up close. Answer choice (D), the best answer, corrects this problem by stating closer viewing reveals them to be composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets. This indicates that the rings are already composed of icy ringlets, but the rings' composition is not obvious until the rings are viewed from up close.

I hope this makes sense!
-dan

(B) seems to have a much better parallelism with "when"; (D) seems ungrammatical at least as far as parallelism is concerned. Also, what the harm in starting (B) with "Though", thats correct. Finally, often the reason given in explanations here and in OG says that the meaning communicated is wrong such as here it is mentioned "the placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.
". I never get this. Such problems can often be picked out even in correct answer choices, how does one find such errors.

Can you pls elaborate?[/i]

Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.

A) Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.

B) Though Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous when viewed from a distance, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.

C) Saturn's main rings, when viewed from a distance, may appear to be smooth and continuous, though when viewed up close they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.

D) When viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous, but closer viewing reveals them to be composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.

E) Though composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets if viewed up close, the main rings of Saturn may appear smooth and continuous when they are viewed from a distance.

[rahul.gmat]

Hi Dan, thanx for the reply. I totally agree on the logical sense part of (D) being better than that of (B).
But like you said, clarity of meaning is a lesser priority than grammar. So he violation of parallelism and the passive structure (highly frowned upon in the GMAT), make (D) gramatically wrong. And wont that supercede clarity of meaning leading to elimination of (D).

[reply2spg]

Dear Rahul,

Sorry to point out, but I want to say one thing here that please make your posting presentable. I hope you get what I am referring to. I really appreciate Dan's effort that he answered the question may be by reading your posting else I think he knew what the question is and what you are going to ask.

Dear Dan, I have a question about option B. If I am not wrong then GMAT will never test only on one aspect but test on multiple aspects. Keep that thing in mind I am unable to understand option B. Other than meaning is there any other reason why option B is wrong? It is very easy to miss that meaning in the test. I hope you agree with me, if not please help to understand.

Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.


Though viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear to be smooth and continuous, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.
Though Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous when viewed from a distance, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.
Saturn's main rings, when viewed from a distance, may appear to be smooth and continuous, though when viewed up close they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.
When viewed from a distance, Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous, but closer viewing reveals them to be composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets.
Though composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets if viewed up close, the main rings of Saturn may appear smooth and continuous when they are viewed from a distance.
The original sentence introduces the main clause with "though viewed from a distance", which establilshes the expectation of a contradiction that never materializes. For example, "Though sleepy, the child stayed awake" is correct, whereas "Though sleepy, the child may have eaten soup" is not. Also, "when viewed up close" is placed in such a way as to illogically suggest that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close. Finally, "appear to be" is redundant.


(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) This choice incorrectly introduces the main clause with "though." Additionally, the placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(C) This choice incorrectly uses the redundant phrase "appears to be." Additionally, the use and placement of the words "when viewed up close, they are . . ." illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(D) CORRECT. This choice replaces "though" with "when" and shortens "appear to be" to "appear." Further, its use of the phrase "closer viewing reveals" clearly indicates that the close viewing only reveals (not causes) the composition of the rings.

(E) This choice incorrectly introduces the main clause with "though." Additionally, the placement of "if viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.

(B) seems to have a much better parallelism with "when"; (D) seems ungrammatical at least as far as parallelism is concerned. Also, what the harm in starting (B) with "Though", thats correct. Finally, often the reason given in explanations here and in OG says that the meaning communicated is wrong such as here it is mentioned "the placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close.
". I never get this. Such problems can often be picked out even in correct answer choices, how does one find such errors.

Can you pls elaborate?[/i]

[tim]

B is wrong because it violates parallelism. The first half talks about how the rings APPEAR at a distance, whereas the second half talks about how they ARE. And even if you disagree with my interpretation (and it's okay to do so - after all, Dan does!), we still have the problem with it making no sense, as Dan described..

D doesn't violate parallelism, because when you have a coordinating conjunction like a comma-but you have two INDEPENDENT clauses. The point of them being independent is that they don't have to be parallel or relate in ANY other way..

And reply2, i don't think your post was any more presentable than rahul's. i don't know what you were getting at, but i had a much harder time understanding your post than i did rahul's..

[ivy]

Hello,

Option B:
Though Saturn's main rings may appear smooth and continuous when viewed from a distance, they are in fact composed of thousands of separate icy ringlets when viewed up close.

Is there any grammatical error present in option B?

In option B, the subordinate clause('Though Saturn's main rings..') contains the noun('Saturn's main rings') and it's referenced by main clause using pronoun('they'). Is it a rule that the subordinate clause can refer to noun in main clause, but not the other way round? Is this a grammatical error present in the sentence? I think this is not an error. I asked the question just to be sure. :)

Furthermore, option B uses construction 'Though.., ..in fact..'. Is this a redundant expression?

Thanks a lot! :)

[tim]

No redundancy here. As for subordinate clauses and main clauses, the mere definition of those two means that a subordinate clause can modify the main clause but NOT the other way around. I won't bother answering your question about grammatical problems in B, because the reason B is wrong has been thoroughly discussed above..

[ghong14]

For this problem I approached the issue with a meaning elimination. All of the WRONG answer choices seem to make a illogical modifier with the incorrect use of when, making it sound like the rings are made of icy ringlets only when viewed up close though in reality the rings are in fact made of icy ringlets. This reminded me of another problem "examples of neurogensis" which is found in this thread:

recently-documented-examples-of-neurogenesis-t931.html

This problem also use "when" in the incorrect manner because it seems to state that the brain growth occurs only when the mice is placed in the stimulating environment but in reality the growth occurred and will be there indefinitely.

My issue is whenever I have seen WHEN pop up in a sentence correction I have been extra careful about whether it modifies the correct concept. But I wanted some guidance on when the usage of WHEN is appropriate. What is the grammatical rule when it comes to the use of when???

[jnelson0612]

"when" is appropriate to use when it is a modifier describing some sort of time frame. I often see it used incorrectly in situations in which "when" is being used to modify a noun or something that is now referring to actual time.

[NezieM595]

Thanks Manhattan GMAT instructors.
You guys are doing a great job.
But I don't understand this one at all.
I've gone back my Strategy Guide & the flashcards and got nothing that explains this for me.
This meaning thing is really taken to a very arcane corner. But I believe I'll understand this if you guys explain the question I'm about to ask.
You said
"placement of "when viewed up close" illogically suggests that the rings are composed of icy ringlets as a result of being viewed up close"

Wasn't that the meaning?
You viewed it from a distance and it appeared as X. Then u views it closely it appeared as Y.
It appeared as Y because you viewed it closely.
Am I missing something?
Cos may be it would appear as Z if you even viewed it closer.
WAS IT NOT THE VIEWING DISTANCE THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE APPEARANCE?
SINCE IT WASN'T(I believe u guys are right), THEN WHAT WAS?
I want to understand please.

[tim]

Look closely at the original problem. The wrong answers all say that the rings are composed of thousands of ringlets when viewed up close, as though they *weren't* composed of thousands of ringlets when viewed from afar. Viewing them up close does not change their fundamental nature, but all four wrong choices suggest this.