Although the first pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed

[Gellar]

Although the first pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, to be sighted was in the summer of 1967 by graduate student Jocelyn Bell, it had not been announced until February, 1968.

(A) Same

(B) Although not announced until February, 1968, in the summer of 1967 graduate student Jocelyn Bell observed the first pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, to be sighted.

(C) Although observed by graduate student Jocelyn Bell in the summer of 1967, the discovery of the first sighted pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, had not been announced before February, 1968.

(D) The first pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, to be sighted was observed in the summer of 1967 by graduate student Jocelyn Bell, but the discovery was not announced until February, 1968.

(E) The first sighted pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, was not announced until February, 1968, while it was observed in the summer of 1967 by graduate student Jocelyn Bell.

The OA is D. Is "sighted plusar" better than "to be sighted", since the pulsar has alreadly been sighted?
Meanwhile, what's wrong with choice E? Thanks

[H]

I think that E is wrong mainly because the sentence wants to express that the discovery of a star wasn't announced until 1968.
It is common to hear that a person announce a discovery but not a star(I believe).

I think "sighted" is better than "to be sighted" as well because "to.." is usually used for showing the purpose of doing something.

I didn't get this question right either. I thought that "to be sighted" is redundant because of "was observed"....this question is purely using POE?

[Guest]

(E) The first sighted pulsar, or rapidly spinning collapsed star, was not announced until February, 1968, while it was observed in the summer of 1967 by graduate student Jocelyn Bell.

You can't announce the first sighted pulsar or rapidly spining collapsed star...it's the discover that was not announced.

choice E is missing this Discovery....

D is better

[RonPurewal]

The OA is D. Is "sighted plusar" better than "to be sighted", since the pulsar has alreadly been sighted?

no, 'to be sighted' is better for at least two reasons.

(1) 'first NOUN to be VERBed' is generally the preferred form in discussing the results of human efforts/actions/interference/perception/etc., while 'first VERBed NOUN' is generally used to indicate inherent qualities of the noun.
for instance, the following sentence is preferred:
henry bishop was the first musician to be knighted by a british monarch. --> knighting is performed by humans
the following is NOT preferred:
henry bishop was the first knighted musician in britain. --> this makes it seem as though being 'knighted' is an inherent quality with which henry bishop was born, or that he acquired it naturally/accidentally in some other way

(2) the word 'sighted' means 'having the sense of sight', so this sentence also contains the amusing alternative interpretation of referring to a pulsar that can actually see.

Meanwhile, what's wrong with choice E? Thanks

first of all, the word 'discovery' is missing. that's a crucial shift in meaning: it's the discovery, not the pulsar itself, that was 'announced'.
also, the word 'while' - which is sometimes used to indicate contrast - creates a strange ambiguity here: on first reading, it appears to suggest that the announcement (which took place in '68) happened during the summer of '67; this is the usual sense of 'while' occurring in this place in a sentence. (normally, if used to mark contrast, 'while' appears in front of a sentence.)

[Gellar]

Thank you Ron, awesome explanation

[StaceyKoprince]

agreed! :)

[H]

Isn't "to be sighted" redundant because of "observed"?

[tathagat]

To be sighted is not redundant because "the first pulsar to be sighted was observed" has a different meaning from "first pulsar was observed"
Reread and you will know :-)

Btw ,Superb Explanation Ron!

[RonPurewal]

To be sighted is not redundant because "the first pulsar to be sighted was observed" has a different meaning from "first pulsar was observed"
Reread and you will know :-)

yes. it's essential to state that this is the first pulsar to be sighted; there were certainly lots and lots of pulsars before it, but none of those pulsars had the good luck to be sighted. if you just say "the first pulsar", then you mean that it's literally the first one.

Btw ,Superb Explanation Ron!

thanks.

[sandeep.19+man]

In D "or rapidly spinning collapsed star" is not a modifier, correct?

Therefore "or rapidly spinning collapsed star" does not refer to the "first pulsar" but only to the "pulsar". Right?

Thanks a lot.

[RonPurewal]

In D "or rapidly spinning collapsed star" is not a modifier, correct?

Therefore "or rapidly spinning collapsed star" does not refer to the "first pulsar" but only to the "pulsar". Right?

Thanks a lot.

you know, i don't really know how you would classify that construction. it probably doesn't count as a modifier, because it doesn't actually modify the noun -- i.e., it doesn't expand upon, restrict, or change the meaning of the noun in any way, as modifiers do.

in any case, regardless of how you may or may not choose to classify it, you should know what this sort of construction (comma + OR + words) does: basically, it provides a definition of the word that comes before it.
e.g.
an own-goal, or goal accidentally scored in one's own net and counting towards the other team's score, is possibly the most embarrassing feat that a soccer player can accomplish.
here, the words following "or" (goal accidentally ... score) are the definition of the term "own-goal".

--

disclaimer:
the above usage is definitely not the only use of "comma + OR"; a much more common use for that construction is as a conventional conjunction, connecting two parallel structures. however, you should know this less common construction, so that you don't immediately mark it as wrong upon seeing it.

[redable]

also, the word 'while' - which is sometimes used to indicate contrast - creates a strange ambiguity here: on first reading, it appears to suggest that the announcement (which took place in '68) happened during the summer of '67; this is the usual sense of 'while' occurring in this place in a sentence. (normally, if used to mark contrast, 'while' appears in front of a sentence.)[/quote]


Hi Ron,
I still don't know why "while" used here would suggest that announcement (which took place in '68) happened during the summer of '67

Thanks for your response

[jazeltq]

The OA is D. Is "sighted plusar" better than "to be sighted", since the pulsar has alreadly been sighted?

no, 'to be sighted' is better for at least two reasons.

(1) 'first NOUN to be VERBed' is generally the preferred form in discussing the results of human efforts/actions/interference/perception/etc., while 'first VERBed NOUN' is generally used to indicate inherent qualities of the noun.
for instance, the following sentence is preferred:
henry bishop was the first musician to be knighted by a british monarch. --> knighting is performed by humans
the following is NOT preferred:
henry bishop was the first knighted musician in britain. --> this makes it seem as though being 'knighted' is an inherent quality with which henry bishop was born, or that he acquired it naturally/accidentally in some other way

(2) the word 'sighted' means 'having the sense of sight', so this sentence also contains the amusing alternative interpretation of referring to a pulsar that can actually see.

Meanwhile, what's wrong with choice E? Thanks

first of all, the word 'discovery' is missing. that's a crucial shift in meaning: it's the discovery, not the pulsar itself, that was 'announced'.
also, the word 'while' - which is sometimes used to indicate contrast - creates a strange ambiguity here: on first reading, it appears to suggest that the announcement (which took place in '68) happened during the summer of '67; this is the usual sense of 'while' occurring in this place in a sentence. (normally, if used to mark contrast, 'while' appears in front of a sentence.)

i am sorry . i still don't quite catch you perhaps because i am not a native english speaker.
i though that what 'to be sighted' describes is something that would happen.
can you explain the usage of 'NOUN to be verb-ed' more specifically ?
thanks a lot

[RonPurewal]

i am sorry . i still don't quite catch you perhaps because i am not a native english speaker.
i though that what 'to be sighted' describes is something that would happen.
can you explain the usage of 'NOUN to be verb-ed' more specifically ?
thanks a lot

ah, i see -- you are thinking about "NOUN to be VERBed" in general.

what i wrote above is particular to "the first NOUN to be VERBed". that construction is specifically used to indicate a "first" achievement that is historically significant in some way.
i.e.
Smith was the first player from Duluth to be chosen for the national team.
--> this sentence implies that no one from duluth had ever been chosen for the national team before smith was; the writing of this statement implies that the choosing of smith is, in some way, important or significant.

(duluth, if you don't know, is a city in minnesota, u.s.a.)

this is NOT a generalization to all constructions of the form "NOUN to be VERBed"; your idea of that construction is already fairly accurate.

[HanzZ]

The OA is D. Is "sighted plusar" better than "to be sighted", since the pulsar has alreadly been sighted?

no, 'to be sighted' is better for at least two reasons.

(1) 'first NOUN to be VERBed' is generally the preferred form in discussing the results of human efforts/actions/interference/perception/etc., while 'first VERBed NOUN' is generally used to indicate inherent qualities of the noun.
for instance, the following sentence is preferred:
henry bishop was the first musician to be knighted by a british monarch. --> knighting is performed by humans
the following is NOT preferred:
henry bishop was the first knighted musician in britain. --> this makes it seem as though being 'knighted' is an inherent quality with which henry bishop was born, or that he acquired it naturally/accidentally in some other way

(2) the word 'sighted' means 'having the sense of sight', so this sentence also contains the amusing alternative interpretation of referring to a pulsar that can actually see.

Meanwhile, what's wrong with choice E? Thanks

first of all, the word 'discovery' is missing. that's a crucial shift in meaning: it's the discovery, not the pulsar itself, that was 'announced'.
also, the word 'while' - which is sometimes used to indicate contrast - creates a strange ambiguity here: on first reading, it appears to suggest that the announcement (which took place in '68) happened during the summer of '67; this is the usual sense of 'while' occurring in this place in a sentence. (normally, if used to mark contrast, 'while' appears in front of a sentence.)

Hello Ron,

I just have a quick question regarding your discussion above.

Is there a difference in meaning between:
1) The first pulsar to be sighted
and
2) The first pulsar sighted

To me the second option sounds better because it seems to indicated that the pulsar has been sighted. Or does it still indicate a inherent quality as 'sighted pulsar' does?

Thank you very much for your kind response.

Henry