What Appears and Appear

[tim]

"appear to be" is redundant in the example you cite because it is followed by an adjective. in the original sentence in this thread, it is followed by a noun, so if we eliminate "to be" we are omitting words that are necessary..

[lindaliu9273]

Dear instructors,

I choose C here. And I don't know why C is wrong because I think "what appears" is the subject of "is stunning evidence".

what appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and (what appears ) is stunning evidence that ....

Please point out what I misunderstand. If there's other mistakes with C, I'll be appreciated.

Thank you so much.

[RonPurewal]

Choice C has two verbs in a row, both of which ostensibly have the same subject ("appears was"). Not ok.

[Chieh-hsiuC131]

Hi instructors,

I thought "appear to V(present tense)" means that "the thing" that appears to V does not happen yet. The author just speculates the thing might happen.
"appear to have Ved " means that "the thing" has happened. The author speculates the thing happened.

Am I right?
If this concept works, choice D uses "appears to be" will suggest that wooden spears from an ancient hunting ground does not happen.

Could you please help me out on this?
Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Hi instructors,

I thought "appear to V(present tense)" means that "the thing" that appears to V does not happen yet.

This is a strange idea. Where did you get it?

The present tense ("appear") means exactly what it normally means.

You appear to misunderstand the use of the present tense.
—> I.e., it seems (right now) that you misunderstand (right now) the present tense.

[RonPurewal]

Also, one more possible point of confusion:
"To ___" and "to have ___ed" are not verbs, so they don't have "tenses". Only verbs have tenses.

In the construction "You appear to ___", the only verb tense is the present tense of "appear".

[Chieh-hsiuC131]

Hi Ron,

thanks for the explanation.
But I still do not understand whether there are differences between "appear to___" and "appear to have____".
Here are some correct sentences from the GMAT
1.Combining enormous physical strength with higher intelligence, the Neanderthals appear to have been equipped to face any obstacle the environment could put in their path, but their relatively sudden disappearance during the Paleolithic era indicates that an inability to adapt to some environmental change led to their extinction.

2.Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what appears to be an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence that human ancestors systematically hunted big game much earlier than believed.

Would you please explain under what kind of situation we use appear to___ and under what kind of situation we use appear to have_____?

Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

"to ___" —> same timeframe as the larger sentence/context in which it appears

"to have ___ed" —> earlier than the timeframe of the larger sentence/context

E.g.,

You appear to be injured. (It seems that you're injured right now.)
vs.
You appear to have been injured at work. (You may still be hurt; you may be OK now. The injury happened earlier.)

The Neanderthals don't exist anymore—and the main sentence is in the present (it's about what appears to be the case NOW)—so we definitely need "to have ___".

[Chieh-hsiuC131]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the quick reply!
That is great explanation.
Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

[GeetanshB252]

Hi Ron,

Can you please explain why C is wrong. The ancient lakeshore hunting ground was in the past and thus cant appear to be one at the present. Therefore i felt using was would be a better option.

Regards
Geetansh

[RonPurewal]

try putting C back into the sentence. watch what happens at the beginning of the underlined part... not good.

"what appears was"
two consecutive verbs with the same subject? nope.

don't neglect the non-underlined part!
in particular, pay attention to what happens at the interface between the underlined and non-underlined parts when you insert a choice into the full sentence.

[inc.manni]

Understanding the meaning is Important I hope.

Researchers in Germany have taken out wooden spears FROM - what appears as lakeshore hunting site.

Now this discovery shows something ---- which sentence goes on to explain further.

Now the elimination part

A - It has no antecedent - its better to say that what appears to be a hunting site.

B - Same LOGIC as A - Also parallelism issue what appears as hunting ground and stunning evidence - actually hunting ground is not an evidence but discovery of wooden spears is. Also the use of IS - cant refer back to wooden spears

C - parallelism issue - as in B

D - Correct - found wooden spears from what appears to be hunting ground - modifier stunning evidence modifies the preceding clause.

E -It has no antecedent - also stunning evidence of human ancestors - is incorrect - CHANGES THE MEANING ALTOGETHER

Please guide whether (i thought twice to write whether or if ) above makes sense.

Sometimes even if we don't know the correct idiom then also we have other elimination points with meaning at top priority.

[RonPurewal]

all of that seems to be on point, with only one exception: choice B does not contain "is", so i can't tell what your objection is there.

[amits428]

Hello Ron,

Sincere apologies for digging up a 5 year old post.

Could you please explain why option C is incorrect? Is it because of an incorrect idiom usage which ideally should 'appears to be'?

Regards,
Amit