Whereas pure science is mainly concerned with the discovery

[dheeru500]

Whereas pure science is mainly concerned with the discovery of new truths and makes few, if any, attempts to discern the best options between their potential uses, applied science involves the application of existing truths to concrete problems.

A.best options between their potential uses
B. best options between its potential uses
C. best of the options among their potential uses
D. best options among its potential uses
E. best options among their potential uses


Hi RON/STACEY,

Could you please explain what their and its are referring to in above Sentence.

[dheeru500]

Sorry, forgot to post the answer.
OA is E.

Source : GMAT CLUB TESTS.

[RonPurewal]

Could you please explain what their and its are referring to in above Sentence.

What's your understanding?

Think about the context here for a bit.
What has "potential uses"?

[dheeru500]

Hi Ron,

This is my understanding of the question .
In this question, we have a comparison between uses of Applied Science and uses of Pure Science. I believe Pure Science has Potential uses and as Pure Science is Singular , we need to Use it's rather than their.

Structure wise , this is an dependent Clause + Independent clause.

Could you tell me whether my interpretation was correct

Though this is my first post, I want to thank you for giving wonderful explanations.I and my friends go through your posts especially to note the takeaways . I got a good Knowledge after going through your posts . Thanks a lot

Could you please explain what their and its are referring to in above Sentence.

What's your understanding?

Think about the context here for a bit.
What has "potential uses"?

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

This is my understanding of the question .
In this question, we have a comparison between uses of Applied Science and uses of Pure Science. I believe Pure Science has Potential uses and as Pure Science is Singular , we need to Use it's rather than their.

I can see where you're coming from here. I don't agree that this is the intended meaning"”but I think it's way too close for an official problem. (On GMAC's problems, there will be one very clear intended meaning; other interpretations will be very clearly incorrect/unreasonable.)

When I read this sentence, I see "Pure science is concerned with the discovery of truths, not so much with applications of those truths". Hence their, referring to the truths.

Honestly, as with every other sentence, that's just an on-the-spot reading; i.e., like other "normal" reading, it doesn't involve conscious thought to discern the meaning.

In retrospect, though, I can see at least two reasons why the pronoun should not refer to pure science itself:
1/
It's pretty clear that "pure science" as a whole does not have "potential uses""”it's way, way, WAY too broad. (As an analogy, consider making a a sail in the shape of a right triangle"”a process that could serve as an application of the Pythagorean theorem. Now consider whether you could make a shape that would be "an application of geometry" as a whole.)
2/
It doesn't make sense to say that "pure science considers the applications of pure science". I.e., a field can't consider itself.
For instance, if a field involves applications of physics, then it's not "physics" anymore"”it's engineering, or ballistics, or pharmacokinetics, or kinesiology, or whatever other field. And so on.

At the end of the day, though, I don't think your interpretation is unreasonable. So, the problem is simply not good enough for the GMAT.
So, forget this problem"”and, for good measure, cast a suspicious eye on the source.

[dheeru500]

Hi Ron,

This is my understanding of the question .
In this question, we have a comparison between uses of Applied Science and uses of Pure Science. I believe Pure Science has Potential uses and as Pure Science is Singular , we need to Use it's rather than their.

I can see where you're coming from here. I don't agree that this is the intended meaning"”but I think it's way too close for an official problem. (On GMAC's problems, there will be one very clear intended meaning; other interpretations will be very clearly incorrect/unreasonable.)

When I read this sentence, I see "Pure science is concerned with the discovery of truths, not so much with applications of those truths". Hence their, referring to the truths.

Honestly, as with every other sentence, that's just an on-the-spot reading; i.e., like other "normal" reading, it doesn't involve conscious thought to discern the meaning.

In retrospect, though, I can see at least two reasons why the pronoun should not refer to pure science itself:
1/
It's pretty clear that "pure science" as a whole does not have "potential uses""”it's way, way, WAY too broad. (As an analogy, consider making a a sail in the shape of a right triangle"”a process that could serve as an application of the Pythagorean theorem. Now consider whether you could make a shape that would be "an application of geometry" as a whole.)
2/
It doesn't make sense to say that "pure science considers the applications of pure science". I.e., a field can't consider itself.
For instance, if a field involves applications of physics, then it's not "physics" anymore"”it's engineering, or ballistics, or pharmacokinetics, or kinesiology, or whatever other field. And so on.

At the end of the day, though, I don't think your interpretation is unreasonable. So, the problem is simply not good enough for the GMAT.
So, forget this problem"”and, for good measure, cast a suspicious eye on the source.

Thanks Ron :)

[tim]

:)

[RonPurewal]

With sentence correction in particular, it's important to find precedents in official problems for whatever issue(s) you are seeking to examine.

The GMAT tests a very narrow band of possible issues in the written English language"”and does so in a very precise way. Few sources approximate GMAC's style well.