Ice-polished rocks - MGMAT SC text clarification

[thanghnvn]

c) when great ice sheets existed where there were areas (now temperate)

The problem isn't that "where" is misplaced, it's that the word is illogical. Ice sheets existed where there were areas? Nope.

Thank you Lucero

I think meaning of C is still logic.

ice sheet existed where there were areas which are now temperate.

but clearly meaing in C is not the intended meaning, the meaning in B.

on many og problems, I see that the distorted meaning in wrong answer choices is not illogic when this meaning stand alone. but if we see this distorted meaning in comparision with the intended meaning, we realize the meaning distortion .

this situation makes me thing of a following rule.

when we see 2 meaning/answer choices both of which are logic, USE COMMON SENSE to realize which is the distorted meaning.

do you have any comment on this rule

[jlucero]

c) when great ice sheets existed where there were areas (now temperate)

The problem isn't that "where" is misplaced, it's that the word is illogical. Ice sheets existed where there were areas? Nope.

Thank you Lucero

I think meaning of C is still logic.

ice sheet existed where there were areas which are now temperate.

but clearly meaing in C is not the intended meaning, the meaning in B.

on many og problems, I see that the distorted meaning in wrong answer choices is not illogic when this meaning stand alone. but if we see this distorted meaning in comparision with the intended meaning, we realize the meaning distortion .

this situation makes me thing of a following rule.

when we see 2 meaning/answer choices both of which are logic, USE COMMON SENSE to realize which is the distorted meaning.

do you have any comment on this rule

I agree with using common sense. You are using that to say that C's meaning is illogical.

Ice sheets existed where there WERE now temperate areas.

You can't say that something existed in the past in places that "were (past) now (present) temperate areas"

The only time when you'd possibly see a "was now" reference is something that's more colloquial- I was now responding to your question; this shows something that just happened (which also doesn't make sense here, the areas didn't just become temperate). On the GMAT you'd instead see:

I was responding to your question (in the past)
I am now responding to your question (present)

[piyush_nitr01]

Hello GMAT instructors,

Could you please explain, what's wrong with D?

Thanks in advance !!

[tim]

first, there is a problem with the verb tense - "had existed" should only show up if you are distinguishing two different things that happened in the past where it would otherwise be impossible to tell from syntax which one occurred first..

second, these glaciers existed in the distant past, not in a "current" anything..

[tim]

I'd like to address further the "in which" versus "when" issue. I know Ron implied they are pretty much interchangeable, so take what I write here with a grain of salt and do let me know if you find any actual GMAT examples that contradict the following:

In my experience, "in which" usually refers to a time period of some duration. In other words, I could say that 2008 was the year in which I won the lottery, but I could not say that 9:08pm was the time in which the lottery drawing took place. In general, I think if you cannot say "X happened in Y", you cannot say "Y is the [temporal marker] in which X occurred". (I could say I won the lottery in 2008, but I could not say the lottery drawing took place in 9:08pm.)

"When" seems to be more versatile and can be used in either situation.

[riderofthestorm]

I know Ron has mentioned it several times that we should not be fixated on verb mistakes but I was wondering something.

Can we justify avoiding past participle by looking into the meaning of the sentence?

Here is what I am trying to say:
In option A, if we use past participle, we would mean ice sheets have a direct effect on L.A's proposal. However his study on ice-polished rocks had a direct impact on his proposal. Therefore, using past participle is wrong and we should chose B.

If I am wrong, I will just stop trying to justify the past participle-past tense difference.

[RonPurewal]

... so i googled "past participle" (i don't really know these terms), and it doesn't appear that this is anything that's actually in this problem.

i.e., from what i gather, "past participle" refers to things like given, driven, gone, done, etc., used as modifiers.
there's nothing like that in this problem -- there's just "existed" and "had existed", which are verbs, not modifiers.

are you referring to something else?

[riderofthestorm]

are you referring to something else?

Oops I mean past perfect.

Anyways when I re-read some of the posts, I saw the original choice A is altered. So I understand that we won't be asked to pick an answer between two options in the exam like the following:

(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

[jlucero]

are you referring to something else?

Oops I mean past perfect.

Anyways when I re-read some of the posts, I saw the original choice A is altered. So I understand that we won't be asked to pick an answer between two options in the exam like the following:

(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

Ummmm... unless I'm missing something, this is the exact split that you have to chose from on a GMAT Prep question-- the resource most similar to the real test. So I'd say you absolutely have to know how to tell the difference b/w these two.

[ecisn33186]

I'd like to address further the "in which" versus "when" issue. I know Ron implied they are pretty much interchangeable, so take what I write here with a grain of salt and do let me know if you find any actual GMAT examples that contradict the following:

In my experience, "in which" usually refers to a time period of some duration. In other words, I could say that 2008 was the year in which I won the lottery, but I could not say that 9:08pm was the time in which the lottery drawing took place. In general, I think if you cannot say "X happened in Y", you cannot say "Y is the [temporal marker] in which X occurred". (I could say I won the lottery in 2008, but I could not say the lottery drawing took place in 9:08pm.)

"When" seems to be more versatile and can be used in either situation.

Tim, what about "Judie drove her car at a time in which driving was relatively new." The OG says, in a similar question, that "when" should be used, not "in which". Based on your explanation, couldn't you say that "I won the lottery in a time (with time period being implied)." It does sound awkward though.

Also, with regard to verb tenses, the past perfect shouldn't be used here because there is no other past event for it to be the past of; I guess you could use "led", but it's obvious that the ice age happened before Louis was born.

Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

I'd like to address further the "in which" versus "when" issue. I know Ron implied they are pretty much interchangeable, so take what I write here with a grain of salt and do let me know if you find any actual GMAT examples that contradict the following:

In my experience, "in which" usually refers to a time period of some duration. In other words, I could say that 2008 was the year in which I won the lottery, but I could not say that 9:08pm was the time in which the lottery drawing took place. In general, I think if you cannot say "X happened in Y", you cannot say "Y is the [temporal marker] in which X occurred". (I could say I won the lottery in 2008, but I could not say the lottery drawing took place in 9:08pm.)

"When" seems to be more versatile and can be used in either situation.

Tim, what about "Judie drove her car at a time in which driving was relatively new." The OG says, in a similar question, that "when" should be used, not "in which". Based on your explanation, couldn't you say that "I won the lottery in a time (with time period being implied)." It does sound awkward though.

(NOTE: There is absolutely no way you'd need this kind of thing to eliminate a choice. If you see a difference like this, look for something else first.)

"(A) time" is in the same category as things like "9:08 p.m." (as mentioned by Tim above). In other words, the writer views the "time" as a point on a timeline, rather than a time period. So, you can't use "in a time" or "a time in which".

Curiously, "Mozart's time" or "his time" or "her time" (as opposed to "a time") refers to a time period, not a point on a timeline. So you can use "in" or "in which" with those.

Again -- If you see something like this, you can be fairly certain that it's there to distract you from easier decisions. Look for something more straightforward first.

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi

After using the POE, I came up with B and E. I chose B for concision but that's not sitting well with me.

Why is E's modifier incorrect -- "areas now that are temperate"?

[RonPurewal]

Hi

After using the POE, I came up with B and E. I chose B for concision but that's not sitting well with me.

Why is E's modifier incorrect -- "areas now that are temperate"?

"Now" comes directly after "... existed in areas""”implying that this (past) existence is somehow happening right now.

[HanzZ]

Hello Experts,

I have two questions about the non underlined part of this question:

1) His studies OF ice-polished rocks IN his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers...

I wonder whether "far outside the range of present-day glaciers" modifies ice-polished rocks (by meaning)? I understand that when we have noun 1 + prepositional + noun 2, a modifier can modify either noun 1 or noun 2; however, noun 2 here is interrupted by "in his homeland", is the modification still legitimate?

I guess the reason here is that "in his homeland" is mission-critical?

2)...let Louis Agassiz IN 1837...

I understand that the prepositional phrase IN 1873 actually modifies the entire clause, or the action "propose"; however, on first read it also seems that IN 1837 can qualify Louis Agassiz. Namely, not Louis Agassiz in 2014, not him in 2013, but him in 1837. I know this is nonsense but could you please shed some light on how to treat such ambiguity?

Thank you for your reply!

[RonPurewal]

Hello Experts,

I have two questions about the non underlined part of this question:

1) His studies OF ice-polished rocks IN his Alpine homeland, far outside the range of present-day glaciers...

I wonder whether "far outside the range of present-day glaciers" modifies ice-polished rocks (by meaning)? I understand that when we have noun 1 + prepositional + noun 2, a modifier can modify either noun 1 or noun 2; however, noun 2 here is interrupted by "in his homeland", is the modification still legitimate?

My understanding is that "far outside the range..." describes "Alpine homeland".