VietAccepted

TH

TH

GMAT OFFICIAL GUIDE 12 + 13

SENTENCE CORRECTION REVIEW

(Version 1.0)

Compiled & Edited by: Hung-Le (VietAccepted)

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com

GMAT OFFICIAL GUIDE 12+ 13TH GRAMMAR REVIEW

140

Rock samples taken from the remains of an asteroid about twice the size of the 6-mile-wide asteroid
that eradicated the dinosaurs has been dated to be 3.47 billion years old and thus is evidence of the
earliest known asteroid impact on Earth.
(A) has been dated to be 3.47 billion years old and thus is
(B) has been dated at 3.47 billion years old and thus
(C) have been dated to be 3.47 billion years old and thus are
(D) have been dated as being 3.47 billion years old and thus
(E) have been dated at 3.47 billion years old and thus are

Agreement; Idiom
The plural subject of this sentence, Rock samples, requires
plural verb phraseshave been dated and are rather than
has been dated and is. The idiomatic way of expressing
estimation of age is with the phrase dated at.
A The subject and verbs do not agree; dated to be ... is not
idiomatic.
B The subject and verb do not agree; the conjunction and
thus should be followed by a verb.
C Dated to be is not idiomatic.
D As being is not idiomatic; the conjunction and thus
should be followed by a verb.
E Correct. The plural verbs match the plural subject, and
the wording of the sentence is idiomatic.

The idiomatic way of expressing estimation of age is with the phrase dated at
date..to
P1-129 The teeth and jawbones found in Tanzania by Dr. Mary Leakey and dating to 3.75 million years ago are the oldest reliably dated human fossils.
G21-34 Scientists have dated sharp-edged flakes of stone found in the fine-grained sediments of adry riverbed in the Afar region of Ethiopia to between 2.52 and 2.60
million years ago, pushing back by more than 150,000 years the earliest date at which humans are known to have made stone tools.
date.at
G31-28 Rock samples taken from the remains of an asteroid about twice the size of the 6-nuke-wide asteroid that eradicated the dinosaurs have been dated at 3.47
billion years old and thus are evidence of the earliest known asteroid impact on Earth.
G13-28 Fossils of the arm of a sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on the
Greater Antilles islands.
3. Date back vs Date from
date back: have its origin
date from: to reckon from some point in time
VD: Native American burial sites dating back 5,000 years indicate that the residents of Maine at that time were part of a widespread culture of Algonquian-speaking
people

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
VD: 90 The concept of the grand jury dates from the twelfth century, when Henry II of England ordered panels of common citizens to prepare lists of suspected
criminals in their communities
Prep 1-232. (TTGWD4-Q1)
The Acoma and Hopi are probably the two oldest surviving Pueblo communities, both dating back at least a thousand years.
Prep 2-215 (GWD31-Q28)
Rock samples taken from the remains of an asteroid about twice the size of the 6-nuke-wide asteroid that eradicated the dinosaurs have been dated at 3.47 billion
years old and thus are evidence of the earliest known asteroid impact on Earth.
----------------------------------------A(RON)that's a lot of words.
here's what is actually going on here:
* "at" is a preposition.
* prepositions must be followed by nouns.
* "xxx number of years old" is not a noun.
so, wrong.
---------------------------------------in the other example -- "temperatures estimated at xxxx degrees fahrenheit" -- there's no problem, because "xxxx degrees fahrenheit" is a noun.
i don't think anything else is happening here.
the OG explanations are wrong fairly regularly (though not in most cases); this is one of those times.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
139

The company announced that its profits declined much less in the
second quarter than analysts had expected it to and its business will
improve in the second half of the year.
(A) had expected it to and its business will improve
(B) had expected and that its business would improve
(C) expected it would and that it will improve its business
(D) expected them to and its business would improve
(E) expected and that it will have improved its business

Parallelism; verb tense; antecedent

The original sentence has three problems. The sentence must clarify that the analysts held
their expectations before the company's announcement. That is, it must use the past perfect
had expected to
show action prior to the past tense of announced. The sentence must also use would rather
than will for the company's uncertain business improvement in the future. Secondly, the use
of the singular pronoun it to refer to plural profits is incorrect. Finally, two parallel clauses are
needed because the company made two announcements: one about the decline of profits and
one about the future of its business.
A Use of it to refer to profits is incorrect; use of will is incorrect; the second announcement is
not clear.
B Correct. Removal of it to avoids the error in grammar and eliminates unnecessary words in
this sentence. The addition of that before its business would creates another parallel clause
associated with announced and clarifies that there is a second announcement. Finally,
this sentence properly uses had expected and would.
C Incorrectly uses expected; use of it to refer to profits is incorrect, and would is
unnecessary; the overuse of it and its is confusing; will is
incorrectly used instead of would.
D Incorrectly uses expected; them to is both unnecessary and awkward; also, a second
announcement is not made clear.
E Incorrectly uses expected; incorrectly uses the future perfect (will have improved) that
implies the action will be completed rather than ongoing.

The sentence must clarify that the analysts held their expectations before the companys announcement.
The sentence must also use would rather than will for the companys uncertain business improvement in the future.
Cthe overuse of it and its is confusing
Eincorrectly uses the future perfect (will have improved) that implies the action will be completed rather than ongoing.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com

QHi, Ron and experts, i am confused about the use of would in the correct answer.
i know that "would" have 2 different uses, one is the past tense of "will" ,and the other is conditional.however, in this question, which one of the two functions should
we apply to the would in the correct answer? IMO, i think would here should be the past tense of will, but the explanation provided by OG says that the use of would
here is to show uncertainty.
so ,please clarify me and thank you very much!
Ayou are absolutely correct. if the official guide actually says that, then the official guide is wrong.
expectedRon
the problem in the other three choices involves verb tense; the verb expected is illogically in parallel with the verb "declined".
this situation is illogical because the parallelism doesn't make sense; we are talking about expectations that were in place prior to the decline in profits, and which
ceased to be relevant upon that decline.
this situation -- a state that is ongoing only until another past event, and which is directly related to that past event -- is precisely the kind of situation that requires
the past perfect tense, so the sentence should contain had expected, as in the first two choices.
Some idioms with EXPECT
it is expected that
expect to do sth.
expect sb./sth. to do sth.
expect that
expect sth.
expect sth. from sb.
expect sb. to do sth.
Nhng cch dng SAI vi Expect
sth. be expected for sth. to do
sth. be expected that
it is expected for stb. to do; sth. be expected to do/be
expect sb. that

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
Nhng cch s dng ca Placeholder IT (khi IT khng phi refer n mt antecedent no khc). Ngoi cc cch ny ra th mi cch s dng khc u sai

It + description+ that +complete sentence (independent clause)

It + is obvious + that Medellin will beat National in Wednesdays game.
It+ has been said + that the moon is made of green cheese.
Johnny found it + counterintuitive + that the GMAT tests exceptions to rules just as often as it tests the rules themselves.
It + description+ to +verb (infinitive)
It + is often difficult + to distinguish between a past-tense verb and a past participle.
The rain made it + quite challenging + to drive on the freeway.
It + (TO BE verb) + NOUN + that/who + verb
It + was my own brother + who committed the crime.
these "it"s DO NOT have to stand for nouns.

S hu cch ca GERUND
A noun preceding a gerund must be in the possessive case if the noun is the doer of the action described by the gerund
Right: Mike's SWIMMING is the product of new coaching techniques.
Before applying this rule, make sure that the -ing form does indeed function as a noun rather than as a noun modifier. Sometimes either interpretation may
be possible.
Suspect:I like Mike SWIMMING. (= I like Mike only as he swims, not as he runs? OR I like for him to be swimming rather than lifting weights?)Right:I
like Mike's SWIMMING. (= I like his swimming itself.)Right:Mike SWIMMING is a sight to behold. (Mike himself can be
the sight.)Right:Mike's SWIMMING is a sight to behold. (The swimming can be the sight.)

All the same, try to avoid possessing a gerund at all. In many cases, a less awkward phrasing is possible. For instance, it is generally much better to possess an
action noun that already exists. If you must possess a gerund, try to use a personal pronoun such as Its, Their, His or Her.
if the focus of the construction is the ACTION, then you must use the POSSESSIVE form for the noun/pronoun preceding the "-ing" participle. since
that's fatally awkward to say in words, i'll provide an example:
everyone laughed at me accidentally walking into the girls' bathroom --> WRONG. sorry. this sentence would actually mean that everyone laughed
at me as they were walking into the girls' bathroom.
everyone laughed at my accidentally walking into the girls' bathroom --> CORRECT, because it's the action (my walking into the bathroom, not really
me) that they're laughing at.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
Reporting verbs

138

A reporting verb should be followed by that on the GMAT.

announce, assert, believe, confess, demonstrate, doubt, expect, hold, know, mention, observe, proclaim, reason, recognize, repeat, state,
think, and warn
be convinced, be certain, be assured
Exception to this pattern
Say: GMAT does not require you to put that after the verb say

In no other historical sighting did Halley's Comet

cause such a worldwide sensation as did its return
in 1910-1911.
(A) did its return in 1910-1911
(B) had its 1910-1911 return
(C) in its return of 1910-1911
(D) its return of 1910-1911 did
(E) its return in 1910-1911

Parallelism; Verb form; Logical predication

The single subject of this sentence is Halley's Comet, and its single verb phrase is did cause. The comparison
presented by the sentence is between adverbial phrases describing times when the comet was seen.
Grammatically, the items being compared are parallel prepositional phrases beginning with the preposition in:
in no other sighting and in its return in 1910-1911. This is the clearest, most economical way of presenting the
information. The options that introduce a second verb (did or had) violate the parallelism and introduce a
comparison between the comet itself (subject of the verb did cause) and the comet's return (subject of the
verb did or had).
A This sentence implies a comparison between the comet and its return.
B This sentence implies a comparison between the comet and its return; had is the wrong auxiliary verb form
because it must be followed by caused instead of cause.
C Correct. The parallel prepositional phrases in this sentence correctly compare times when the comet was
sighted.
D This sentence implies a comparison between the comet and its return.
E This sentence violates parallelism, implying a comparison between a prepositional phrase and a noun
phrase.

The comparison presented by the sentence is between adverbial phrase describing times when the comet was seen. Grammaticallythe items being compared are
parallel prepositional phrases beginning with the preposition in
Ethis sentence violates parallelismimplying a comparison between a prepositional phrase and a noun phrase.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com

RON
choice (e) is written with "such a worldwide sensation as its return..." -- implying that the return was the worldwide sensation.
that's not the correct; the intended meaning is that the comet caused a sensation IN its return, a sensation that was greater than any of the sensations that it caused
IN its previous returns.
in general, you can't evaluate comparisons until you know what the sentence is intended to compare in the first place.
QI thought 'in no other historical sighting..' // 'in 1910-1911'
Anope. that's not logically parallel enough.
when you're talking about an event (historical sighting), that event should be placed in parallel with another event (its return).
it's illogical to place an event in parallel with a year or date.
Qalso, on a different forum, someone mentioned that 'it did' is implied.
In no other historical sighting did Halley's comet cause such a worldwide sensation as (it did) in its return of 1910-1911
is there a concrete rule as to when ellipsis can be used?
Ayou can elide the the subject and verb of a clause that's placed in parallel with another if they are an exact match for their counterparts in the other clause.
that's what happens here: the elided words in this case are "halley's comet caused / did cause a worldwide sensation". since they're the same words, you can omit
them.
QFinally, does "such ... as" here mean "a worldwide sensation SUCH AS (C)--in its return of 1910-1911"?
Agood question -- actually, no.
"such an X as Y" is, in terms of meaning, roughly the same as "an X similar to Y" or "an X similar to the X that occurred in situation Y".
you can tell that this is not the more common usage of "such as", because this sentence is definitely not listing examples of any more general category.
it's actually ambiguous. the ambiguity is hard to see, especially because this choice comes last (so that the correct meaning has already been hammered into your
head by the other answer choices), so i'll use an analogy to explain.
in no other music festival did jimi hendrix cause such a spectacle as woodstock.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com

this is ambiguous. there are two possible interpretations:

(1) ...as IN woodstock (this is analogous to the intended meaning of the posted problem)
(2) ...as DID woodstock (i.e., you're comparing the spectacle caused by jimi hendrix to the spectacle caused by woodstock itself)
the same two types of interpretations are possible for the posted problem.
remember that you're going to have to use MEANING to figure out what should be compared.
in this sentence, the non-underlined part contains the following elements:
* the comet DID cause a sensation
* IN no other sighting
so ... if you had "[some other sighting] DID", or "IN [something else that caused a sensation]", then that would be an error -- not necessarily a grammar error, but a
meaning error because it'd be nonsense.
on the other hand, if you saw "IN [some other sighting]", or [something else that caused a sensation] DID", then that would create a valid comparison.
this, by the way, is the reason why choices (a) and (d) are wrong. they aren't grammatical errors; they just set the wrong things up to be compared.
remember that you're going to have to use MEANING to figure out what should be compared.
in this sentence, the non-underlined part contains the following elements:
* the comet DID cause a sensation
* IN no other sighting
so ... if you had "[some other sighting] DID", or "IN [something else that caused a sensation]", then that would be an error -- not necessarily a grammar error, but a
meaning error because it'd be nonsense.
on the other hand, if you saw "IN [some other sighting]", or [something else that caused a sensation] DID", then that would create a valid comparison.
this, by the way, is the reason why choices (a) and (d) are wrong. they aren't grammatical errors; they just set the wrong things up to be compared.
QThe only reason I felt uncomfortable with the OA on this question is because of the 'of' in "in its return of 1910-1911". Isn't "return in" the correct way of saying
it?
Athe "of" is used to avoid the construction "X in Y in Z". the gmat writers (like other good writers) generally use constructions that avoid such bothersome
repetitions.
also, they really go out of their way to avoid repeated-word constructions such as X THAT Y THAT Z or X OF Y OF Z.

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
137

Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who
receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never
regains popularity again.
(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

Verb tense; Parallelism

Faulty parallelism in the relative clause who receives... goes ... regains...
makes it unclear who or what is being described. The original clause
begins by describing a certain kind of composer. As written, with who as
the subject of goes and regains, the last two descriptions illogically
continue to refer to the kind of composer. Logically it must be the
reputation that declines after the composers death.
A Illogically suggests the composer goes into decline after death;
redundant again.
B The two clauses are not parallel, lack a coordinating conjunction, and
do not describe the same thing; redundant again.
C Correct. This sentence presents the proper logic while maintaining
parallel structure and consistent verb tense.
D The verb tenses are inconsistent with present tense used in the first
phrase; redundant again.
E The verb tenses are inconsistent with present tense used in the first
phrase; to maintain parallelism, the verbs must be receives ... declines...
regains.

The original clause begins by describing a certain kind of composer.

Eto maintain parallelism,the verbs must be receivesdeclinesregains
the correct answer (c) contains 2 modifiers in a parallel structure. in such a construction, both parallel modifiers modify the same thing. (this is how parallel structures
work in general, anyway: both parts of ANY parallel structure must have the same grammatical function.)
for instance,
i have a friend who can sing and whose dog can dance.
--> in this sentence, who can sing and whose dog can dance both modify friend.
the same is true with the two modifiers who receives popular acclaim and whose reputation declines in the correct answer to this problem.
Let me just compare the correct answer choice (C) with the original answer choice (A):

10

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
A. often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
C. but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
The first thing to notice here is that Choice C has far many new words than Choice A. These words are but, whose, reputation, former, status. Yet, this choice is the
correct answer.
Now lets analyze both these answer choices from meaning standpoint to better understand the role of the alien words in choice C.

136

Choice A: Per this choice, the sentence says that a certain kind of composer gains popularity while alive, declines after death and never regains his popularity. This
meaning just does not make sense because once the composer has died, he cannot decline any further. This choice conveys absolutely illogical meaning.
Choice C: Per this answer choice, a certain kind of composer gains popularity when alive, but after death, his reputation declines and it never regains its previous
status. Indeed. This answer choice makes all the sense and hence is the correct answer choice.
Whereas in mammals the tinv tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in
Idiom; Rhetorical construction; Parallelism
parallel lines, in birds the tubes form a random pattern.
Whereas introduces two contrasting situations or events and should be
followed by parallel structures. In this sentence, whereas is immediately
(A) Whereas in mammals the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in
followed by a clause beginning with the prepositional phrase in
parallel lines, in birds the tubes
ammals; this means that the second part of the sentence must also be a
(B) Whereas the tiny tubes for the conveying of nutrients to bone cells are arrayed in
clause that opens with a preposition that functions in the same wayin
mammals in parallel lines, birds have tubes that
this case, in birds. This structure clarifies that the things being
(C) Unlike mammals, where the tiny tubes for conveying nutrients to bone cells are arrayed contrasted are the tubes in mammals and the tubes in birds. Incorrect
in parallel lines, birds' tubes
versions of the sentence grammatically contrast tubes and birds,
(D) Unlike mammals, in whom the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells are
mammals and tubes, or birds and mammals.
arrayed in parallel lines, the tubes in birds
(E) Unlike the tiny tubes that convey nutrients to bone cells, which in mammals are arrayed A Correct. Parallel structures make clear that the tubes in mammals
in parallel lines, in birds the tubes
are being contrasted with the tubes in birds.
B The faulty parallelism results in a sentence that is confusing and
unnecessarily wordy.
C The sentence compares mammals and birds' tubes.
D Because of faulty parallelism, this sentence also compares mammals
and tubes in birds.
E This structure is wordy and confusing because of faulty parallelism.

11

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
135

Spanning more than 50 years, Friedrich Muller began his career in an unpromising
apprenticeship as a Sanskrit scholar and culminated in virtually every honor that
European governments and learned societies could bestow.
(A) Muller began his career in an unpromising apprenticeship as
(B) Muller's career began in an unpromising apprenticeship as
(C) Muller's career began with the unpromising apprenticeship of being
(D) Muller had begun his career with the unpromising apprenticeship of being
(E) the career of Muller has begun with an unpromising apprenticeship of

134

Logical predication; Idiom

What spanned more than 50 years? It was Muller's career that spanned 50 years
and culminated in virtually every honor. The correct subject of the sentence
must be Muller's career.
A Muller's career, not Muller, should be the subject of the sentence.
B Correct. Using Muller's career as the subject of the sentence solves the
modification problem with spanning... and provides a logical subject for
culminated.
C Apprenticeship of being is an incorrect idiom; apprenticeship as is correct.
D Muller's career, not Muller, should be the subject of the sentence; past
perfect tense is inappropriate; apprenticeship of being is an incorrect idiom.
E Muller's career is preferable to the career of Miiller, present perfect tense is
incorrect; apprenticeship of should be apprenticeship as.

Note that we do not always use the Past Perfect for earlier actions. In general, you should use Past Perfect only to clarify or emphasize a sequence of past events. The
earlier event should somehow have a bearing on the context of the later event. Moreover, if the sequence is already obvious, we often do not need Past Perfect.
Recently implemented "shift-work equations" based on studies of the human
Grammatical construction
sleep cycle have reduced sickness, sleeping on the job, fatigue among shift
Implementing the equations has reduced sickness, sleeping on the job, and
workers, and have raised production efficiency in various industries.
fatigue; at the same time, it has increased efficiency. The three parallel elements
(have reduced x, y, and z) require and before the final element.
(A) fatigue among shift workers, and have raised
(B) fatigue among shift workers, and raised
A The omission of and before fatigue creates an unclear sentence.
(C) and fatigue among shift workers while raising
B The omission of and before fatigue creates an unclear sentence.
(D) lowered fatigue among shift workers, and raised
C Correct. The use of and in this sentence unites the three parallel elements;
(E) and fatigue among shift workers was lowered while raising
the phrase while raising provides a clear contrast with have reduced.
D And is required to link the parallel elements; the verb reduced applies to all
three parallel elements, so inserting lowered before fatigue illogically suggests
that fatigue actually increased.
E The insertion of was lowered destroys the parallel structure, and thus while
raising has no logical referent here.

12

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
Implementing the equations has reduced sickness,sleeping on the job,and fatigue at the same timeit has increased efficiency.
C:the phrase while raising provides a clear contrast with have reduced.
Step 1) Recognize the sentence structure. Right now the sentence is structured like this:
"studies have reduced X, Y, Z, and have raised Q."
You cannot have this structure! With a "laundry list" like this, you have to end the third item with "and..."
It has to be:
"studies have reduced X, Y, and Z while raising Q."
I was spent a few seconds onsidering another alternate structure like this:
"studies have reduced X, Y, Z, and Q"---but that's not what the sentence is trying to say. The sentence is trying to stay that it RAISED Q---instead of REDUCED Q. So
after a few seconds, I went back to what I was thinking of before.
Step 2) So we conclude we want to REDUCE 3 items, and RAISE the last one.
"studies have reduced item1, item2, and item3 while raising item4."
The word "and" must be there--only choices (C) and (E) have this. Of the two, (C) is much simpler and still accurate. The "was lowered" in (E) shouldn't be there.
Step 3) So we go with (C) and read it again to make sure it makes sense.
"studies have reduced [ (sickness), (sleeping on the job), (and fatigue among shift workers) ] while raising (production efficiency)."
133

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the
resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws
requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.
(A) requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
(B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
(C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect

Rhetorical construction; Agreement

The subject of the clause introduced by saying that is the singular noun
compliance. This subject requires the singular form of the verb protect. The
clearest, most economical way to describe the laws in question is to follow the
word laws with a present participle requiring. To use an infinitive, to require,
seems to indicate that requiring these devices is the objective of the laws,
when in fact the objective is to protect the sea turtles.

13

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
(D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
(E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

A The plural verb protect does not agree with the singular subject
compliance.
B Correct. The singular verb is protecting agrees with the singular subject
compliance, and the participial phrase beginning with requiring concisely and
accurately describes the laws.
C The relative clause that require introduces unnecessary wordiness; the
plural verb protect does not agree with the singular subject compliance.
D To require obscures the purpose of the laws; the plural verb phrase are
protecting does not agree with the singular subject compliance.
E To require obscures the purpose of the laws.

Ron
"require" can also be used simply with a direct object, as in
i require perfection.
this device requires four AA batteries.
these are perfectly good sentences.
(d) and (e)
"laws to require..." isn't a correct idiom if you're discussing the actual text of the laws themselves. if you were discussing the ultimate purpose of those laws, then this
could be idiomatic.
examples:
laws specifying long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> correct (___ing), since that's what the laws actually specify.
laws to specify long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> incorrect (that's not the ultimate purpose of the laws)
laws to discourage drunk driving --> correct (this IS actually the ultimate purpose of the laws)
QRon, pls, help
Can I say that NOUN DOING is used to talk of CONTENT
NOUND TO DO is used to talk of PURPOSE.
for generalization. This is logice point and will be tested on gmat.
Aif those are actually the complete constructions, then your generalization seems valid.

14

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com

however, you should be very careful to ascertain that these actually are the complete constructions. if they are smaller parts of some larger construction, then you
may have to look at other things.

132

131

for instance: i eat eggs and cottage cheese with every meal to promote muscle growth.
--> in this sentence, you can't look at "meal to promote...", because that is not actually a construction. the construction is
(i eat eggs and cottage cheese (with every meal)) (to promote muscle growth).
so, in this case, the infinitive "to promote" applies to the entire preceding clause, not to the noun in front of it.
Although the term "psychopath" is popularly applied to an especially brutal
Logical predication; Grammatical construction;
criminal, in psychology it is someone who is apparently incapable of feeling
Agreement
compassion or the pangs of conscience.
The intent of the sentence is to define the term "psychopath." In this sentence, the
pronoun it refers back to the term and seems illogically to
(A) it is someone who is
refer forward to someone. Logically, an inanimate term cannot be a person or
(B) it is a person
someone. The sentence needs to be reworded so that it is clear that "psychopath" is
(C) they are people who are
a term used to define a specific kind of person.
(D) it refers to someone who is
A This construction illogically asserts that the term is a person.
(E) it is in reference to people
B This construction illogically asserts that the term is a person.
C Plural pronoun they does not agree with the singular noun the term and cannot
refer to psychopath; this construction also asserts that
the term is a person.
D Correct. In this sentence, the verb refers clearly links the term to a particular kind
of person; the alignment of pronouns and antecedents is both logical and
grammatical.
E To be correct, this construction needs a main verb such as used; the construction
is used in reference to is awkward and much wordier than the single word refers; the
plural people should be singular.
The expression "it is in reference" used in answer E is stylistically flawed. It is a very formal expression used to say what you are writing or talking about, especially in
business letters,
e.g.
I am writing to you in reference to the job opening in your department.
Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, while in Rhetorical construction; Logical predication

15

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
Germany it is just over 33 percent.
(A) while in Germany it is just over 33 percent
(B) compared to Germany, which uses just over 33 percent
(C) whereas nuclear power accounts for just over 33 percent of the energy produced
in Germany
(D) whereas just over 33 percent of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany
(E) compared with the energy from nuclear power in Germany, where it is just over 33
percent

This sentence compares percentages and uses the prepositional phrases in

France and in Germany to distinguish the percentage of energy in each
country coming from nuclear power. This information is most efficiently
and clearly presented in two clauses joined by the conjunction whereas,
which signifies a difference between the situations in the two countries.
Each clause must identify what the percentage refers tothat is, the
portion of the respective country's energy that comes from nuclear power.
A While is somewhat ambiguous, since it might indicate simultaneity
rather than contrast; the referent of it is ambiguous, raising questions
about just what two things are being compared.
B This sentence compares 75 percent to Germany; it is not clear what 33
percent refers to.
C Correct. The two clauses joined by whereas indicate clearly that the
comparison is between the different percentages of energy coming from
nuclear power.
D The use of the definite article the makes it seem as though the energy
being referred to in this part of the sentence is that of France.
E This construction is wordy and unclear; the referent of it is ambiguous.

the pronoun 'it' is inappropriate, because 'it' must refer to the ENTIRETY of the noun phrase serving as an antecedent.
for instance, the following is an improper sentence: last year's attendance was ten thousand greater than it was this year
in the above sentence, the pronoun 'it' must necessarily refer to last year's attendance, not just attendance.
the problem in this post has the same issue: the pronoun 'it' must refer to more than ten times as much energy, not just energy - an interpretation that makes no
logical sense. therefore, all answer choices containing the pronoun 'it' are wrong.
if you don't like '...than was the case', you should learn to like it; this is one of those phrases that the gmat writers use to refer to concepts that don't fit under the
usage constraints of traditional pronouns. (another popular one of these constructions is 'do so'.)
consider the following sentence:
over 80% of the energy in almonds comes from fat; by contrast, less than 10% of the energy comes from protein.

16

VietAccepted
OG SC Review Note 1.0 hung.lq.01@gmail.com
--> in this sentence, it should be pretty clear that "the energy"refers to "the energy in almonds".so far so good.
now, for where the trouble comes in:
over 80% of the energy in almonds comes from fat; less than 10% of the energy comes from protein in beef.
this sentence is ambiguous in the same way as the one you posted, but, because you've been "primed" for the meaning of the preceding sentence, it should be easier
for you to see the ambiguity.
i.e., one interpretation of this sentence -- the interpretation in which "the energy" has the same significance as in the preceding sentence -- suggests that some
percentage of the energy in almonds actually comes from beef!
the problem that you posted has the same issue.
It might be easier to see choice D as such (33 has been substituted with 25):
Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, whereas just over 25 percent of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany.
Still a bad sentence needlessly to say, but the meaning is ambiguous and the sentence can easily be interpreted in a way different from its intention. Is it 75% of
France's nuclear energy from France itself and the remaining 25% from Germany? Or is it merely stating a contrast of nuclear production between two countries?

RON:
the pronoun "it" doesn't have a legitimate antecedent
"it" would have to stand for something like "the percentage/proportion/fraction of energy provided by nukes". there is no such noun in the sentence, so "it" is an
orphan.
it can't stand for "the energy", because, upon substitution, that would create a sentence that says ...
in germany the energy is just over 33%
... which is nonsense.

17