GMATPrep

[prashantb03]

Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `

A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years

Why C and Not B?

How does exclusion of "it" help

[RonPurewal]

Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `

A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years

Why C and Not B?

How does exclusion of "it" help

since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure.

in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".)

so, this is all you have to look at:
the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.
this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it").

[rohit21384]

Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `

A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years

Why C and Not B?

How does exclusion of "it" help

since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure.

in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".)

so, this is all you have to look at:
the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.
this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it").

Ron
Please explain the structure of the last part.I am not able to comprehend it.

" the army of terra cotta warrier took 700,000 artisans more than 35 years to complete. "

Can you please make it clear using examples.

Are both (1) 700000 artisans and (2) more than 36 years - objects of the verb "took"
where 1st one is the indirect object of took and 2nd one is direct object.
and is it similar to
The project took them several years to complete


Thanks

[sandeep.19+mg]

B should be the correct answer as the following construct is wrong

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete

it should be

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and IT took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete

or rather

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete IT

What do you think Ron?

[RonPurewal]

B should be the correct answer as the following construct is wrong

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete

it should be

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and IT took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete

or rather

... the army of terra-cotta warriors ...... is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete IT

What do you think Ron?

number one: this is a GMATPREP question. if the correct answer is (c), then the correct answer is (c).

* trying to question the correct answer, and say that some other answer should be correct: COMPLETE WASTE OF YOUR TIME

* trying to understand why the correct answer is correct, and why the incorrect answers are wrong: PROPER STUDY TECHNIQUE

--

number two:

you don't need to repeat "it", since the army is already the subject.
for instance:
I took my bag and went home.
same deal here - "I" is already the subject of both verbs, by default. there's no need to say "...and I went home", a construction that would actually detract from the compactness of the sentence.

[RonPurewal]

Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them `

A. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete them
B. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete it
C. took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete
D. 700,000 artisans took more than 36 years to complete
E. to complete them too 700,000 artisans more than 36 years

Why C and Not B?

How does exclusion of "it" help

since you have a parallel structure with "...and...", one way you can deduce the structure is to (temporarily) eliminate the other half of that parallel structure.

in other words, since "is more than 2000 years old and..." is not underlined, it doesn't contribute to the structure at all, so you can ignore it. (this is the same way in which you can, for instance, detect pronoun case more easily: for instance, "john and i went to the theater" --> "i went to the theater".)

so, this is all you have to look at:
the army ... took the artisans more than 36 years to complete.
this is sufficient on its own, without a pronoun at the end, in much the same way as this: this test is hard to finish (not "hard to finish it").

Ron
Please explain the structure of the last part.I am not able to comprehend it.

" the army of terra cotta warrier took 700,000 artisans more than 35 years to complete. "

Can you please make it clear using examples.

Are both (1) 700000 artisans and (2) more than 36 years - objects of the verb "took"
where 1st one is the indirect object of took and 2nd one is direct object.
and is it similar to
The project took them several years to complete


Thanks

your last analogy is completely 100% correct.

[cyprus]

Hi Ron,

the starting present participial phrase - 'Rivaling the pyramids... as an achievement' - what kind of a modifier is this? Since it is a present participle with a comma, can we assume it modifies both the verb subject and the verb (hence a verb modifier), and therefore, it need not necessarily touch 'the army of terra-cotta warriors'? I'm only wondering how to eliminate the answer choices in first look (considering reading every answer choice in this question will surely take beyond 1m15s).

Many thanks!
DS

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

the starting present participial phrase - 'Rivaling the pyramids... as an achievement' - what kind of a modifier is this? Since it is a present participle with a comma,

that kind of modifier must be followed immediately by the correct subject.

I'm only wondering how to eliminate the answer choices in first look

considering that neither the modifier nor the following subject is underlined, i don't see how this modifier will help you eliminate anything.

(considering reading every answer choice in this question will surely take beyond 1m15s).

i certainly hope you don't think that you have to take exactly the same amount of time on every SC problem.
you can allow more time for longer problems -- and you should allow less time for shorter problems.

[evv89]

Hi everyone!
The question: "in his afterlife" pronoun HIS refers to the army?
Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Hi everyone!
The question: "in his afterlife" pronoun HIS refers to the army?
Thanks

no.
first, that interpretation makes no sense. second, it's ungrammatical -- "army" would have to be represented by it/its, not he/his.

the pronoun stands for "Qin Shi Huang".

[visitdhiraj]

hi

what is wrong with choice D

I understood the pronoun error, but was confused between C and D

Could you please help with all meaning or grammar error in choice D

Thanks
Dheeraj

[tim]

D introduces a new independent clause (including a subject and verb), which is inappropriate without a comma in front of the "and"..

[gdingpan]

Ron~
I saw a sentence in chapter13 of Manhattan (p.255):

The building was demolished TO KEEP IT from falling down accidentally.

Could you please explain the difference between this sentence (we need an object "it" after an infinitive ) and the option C (we dont need an object "it" after an infinitive )??

Thank you in advance~ :)

[RonPurewal]

Ron~
I saw a sentence in chapter13 of Manhattan (p.255):

The building was demolished TO KEEP IT from falling down accidentally.

Could you please explain the difference between this sentence (we need an object "it" after an infinitive ) and the option C (we dont need an object "it" after an infinitive )??

Thank you in advance~ :)

well, that's a completely different construction altogether.

the example you're citing is "to+verb" used to give the purpose of an action.

that's not what's happening in choice (c); that choice uses a different kind of "to" construction, one that expresses some quality of an action (in this case, how long it took).
(a similar construction is That book is very difficult to understand.)

so, they're not comparable in the first place.

[gdingpan]

I am really grateful for your help~ Ron .
Thank you very much!!!