His studies of ice-polished rocks

[acethegmat]

His studies of ice-polished rocks in his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers, led Louis Agassiz in 1837 to propose the concept of an age in which great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas

(A) in which great ice sheets had existed in what are now temperate areas
(B) in which great ice sheets existed in what are now temperate areas
(C) when great ice sheets existed where there were areas now temperate
(D) when great ice sheets had existed in current temperate areas
(E) when great ice sheets existed in areas now that are temperate

Would the experts please explain this one. Led Louis to propose...is in the past. So shouldn't the ice-age be before that. Hence, an ice-age had existed before he proposed. I am confused between A and B.

Thanks.

[stevefeiner5]

Came across this problem as well. Can you explain the past perfect simple past split?

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Came across this problem as well. Can you explain the past perfect simple past split?

Thanks

this question has been transcribed incorrectly; the mistake has already been noted by michael schwartz, here:
post41481.html#p41481

where are you getting this question? apparently there is some other source from which it is coming, since this is now the second time this incorrect version has been posted here.

[ghazal.62]

Hi,

In choice B does "what" act as a relative pronoun?
In general is it OK to use "what" to introduce a clause?

Thanks,
Ghazal

[jnelson0612]

Hi,

In choice B does "what" act as a relative pronoun?
In general is it OK to use "what" to introduce a clause?

Thanks,
Ghazal

Please see Joe's discussion of this issue in this thread: post41481.html#p41481

[ghazal.62]

Hi,
Thanks a lot. according to Joe

"what are now X" is a lesser-used expression that expresses the same meaning as "that are now X".

so "what" can be used in place of "that" only in "What are now X" structure? OG-12- question 50, choice (B) it is stated that "What cannot replace that", are there other exceptions to this rule?

[jlucero]

Hi,
Thanks a lot. according to Joe

"what are now X" is a lesser-used expression that expresses the same meaning as "that are now X".

so "what" can be used in place of "that" only in "What are now X" structure? OG-12- question 50, choice (B) it is stated that "What cannot replace that", are there other exceptions to this rule?

First off, what/that can be used in many different ways, so don't think you should be able to replace one with the other. Secondly, it's an odd expression, but notice that the explanation says that you use the "what" in front of an expresion and "that" afterwards.

The TV shows (that are now popular) are not what I consider entertaining.

(What are now popular) TV shows are not what I consider entertaining.

So the placement is different in #50 and partially why it is incorrect. As I said in that post:

The difference is whether they go before or after the modifier. "that" is much more versatile (and common) in life and on the GMAT.

[ghazal.62]

Hi,
Thanks a lot. according to Joe

"what are now X" is a lesser-used expression that expresses the same meaning as "that are now X".

so "what" can be used in place of "that" only in "What are now X" structure? OG-12- question 50, choice (B) it is stated that "What cannot replace that", are there other exceptions to this rule?

First off, what/that can be used in many different ways, so don't think you should be able to replace one with the other. Secondly, it's an odd expression, but notice that the explanation says that you use the "what" in front of an expresion and "that" afterwards.

The TV shows (that are now popular) are not what I consider entertaining.

(What are now popular) TV shows are not what I consider entertaining.

So the placement is different in #50 and partially why it is incorrect. As I said in that post:

The difference is whether they go before or after the modifier. "that" is much more versatile (and common) in life and on the GMAT.

:) very clarifying, thank you very much.

[RonPurewal]

excellent, glad it helped.

[thanghnvn]

why C is wrong.

I see that C is grammatical and logic if C is stand alone

but

because C stand with B, C is considered the distorted meaning.

this situation is similar to

1.I like his learning English
2. I like him learning English

most of the times, gmat alway consider the 1 is correct and 2 distorting the meaning focus. but if I see 2 stand alone, 2 is correct because I consider the focus of liking is "him", not "learning"

here, I consider, B is correct and C is distorting the meaning.

is my thinking correct?

[RonPurewal]

I see that C is grammatical and logic if C is stand alone

actually, choice (c) has several things wrong with it.

* "where there were areas" doesn't make sense; the sentence should say that ice sheets existed in those areas.
(the current wording seems to suggest that, somehow, ice sheets and "areas" were separate things that both existed in the same location.)

* the past tense "were" doesn't make sense, because the areas are still there. ("there were areas" only makes sense if the areas aren't there anymore.)

* "areas now temperate" is not a valid word order.

[RichaChampion]

Hello Ron sir,

Here the correct answer is B.

In some other thread, you have discussed this about the usage of "what" -

So, here are some examples, which may not encompass the full diversity of ways in which "what" can be used:

The witness told the officer what he saw at the crime scene.
--> The witness told the officer everything he knew.

The witness told the officer things he saw at the crime scene.
--> The witness told the officer only some of the things he knew.

You should take what is in the box.
--> You should take all of it.

You should take something that's in the box.
--> You should take one item.


Can you Please comment in what capacity is what used here in the correct answer choice? Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

this usage of "what" isn't necessary to solving this problem—and i don't think i've ever seen it in any other GMAC problem—so it isn't really worth worrying about in general.

do you understand how it is used in this specific sentence? if so, that's good enough.
just remember—when you see these kinds of "special" or "weird" constructions, THEY ARE JUST DISTRACTIONS from easier / more basic / more straightforward eliminations that appear elsewhere in the choices.

[ZoeZ42]

hi instructors,

I am always sunk in the issue that clause + prep + WH- pronouns

I am have no idea that
1/
relative pronoun stands for. the noun proceeding WH- or noun after WH-,

2/
what's the order of the prep + WH- clause ,

in this case, please help clarify.
it will be great if provide more examples.

thanks a lot
have a nice day

>_~

[RonPurewal]

this problem is from OG. unless this problem is ALSO in the FREE GMATPrep software—and someone can upload a screenshot as proof—we cannot host any further discussion of it.

thank you for respecting the forum rules.