Most of the purported health benefits of tea

[sangeethmani]

I have a doubt here .. Can you refer to "compounds" as 'that'. In my knowledge 'that' is used for singular reference. Could anyone shed some light on this?

[mschwrtz]

There is a tricky distinction here between two uses of that. When that is used as a relative pronoun (to introduce a noun-modifying clause) it can modify a singular or a plural verb. When that is used as what is called a 'demonstrative pronoun,' it must be singular.

Now, I don't want you to memorize the term 'demonstrative pronoun,' so here's an easy way to keep track: If that touches the noun or noun phrase it modifies, it can be singular or plural. If that refers to something it doesn't touch, it must be singular.

And don't forget that that is used in other ways to. In that sentence I just wrote it introduces a subordinate clause. And in the second sentence of this paragraph that is an adjective.

[pitchaivijay]

Why C is wrong ?

[jnelson0612]

Why C is wrong ?

Let's compare C to the correct answer, D.

C. come from antioxidants"”compounds also found in beta carotene, vitamin E, and vitamin C, and
D. come from antioxidants"”compounds that are also found in beta carotene, vitamin E, and vitamin C and that

Since the word "and" is a parallel marker, we must check parallelism. Notice how D is parallel after the dash:
compounds that are . . . . and that inhibit
We have nice verb parallelism here.

C breaks this parallelism by joining a noun and a verb:
compounds . . . and inhibit

[dianapaolasanchez]

Most of the purported health benefits of tea come.... (plural) CORRECT

What happened if the sentence starts by...

The most of the purported health benefits of tea.... (singular)

Does the subject change? The subject will be "the most..." so the verb is singular. Right?

The most of the purported health benefits of tea comes

Thank you

[RonPurewal]

Most of the purported health benefits of tea come.... (plural) CORRECT

What happened if the sentence starts by...

The most of the purported health benefits of tea.... (singular)

there is no such construction in english.

perhaps you are thinking of "the most ADJ" -- as in this song is the most beautiful thing i've heard in months.
or perhaps you are thinking of the spanish noun la mayoría, which can't be translated in this way.

[shah.abhilash]

hi ron,

just wanted to know whether "they" can be used to refer objects like health benefits, compounds,etc. i was in a mindset that "they" can only be used to refer beings like humans,animals,people,etc

[tim]

no, "they" can refer to any plural noun..

[mcmebk]

Ron,
Could please explain the following:
1)the role of single dash--can a single dash have a independent clause or only sub clause is permitted?if there is a dash followed by a comma can the rule of 'both' be applied to it?

if you use a single dash, then the stuff that is set off by the dash must actually continue all the way to the end of the sentence. if you are going to block off a modifier with dashes, then you must use two dashes to block off the modifier.

i.e., there is no such thing as a modifier that is blocked off by a dash on the left, but by a comma on the right. if you have a modifier that does not extend to the end of the sentence, then you must use either two dashes or two commas to set it off.
therefore, your question here ("if there is a dash followed by a comma") actually doesn't make sense, because in any such situation the dash and the comma would be entirely unrelated to each other.

2)by "both"--> you meant 2 dashes= 2 commas?

in that context, i meant
COMMA + (modifier that continues until the end of the sentence)
is the same as
DASH + (modifier that continues until the end of the sentence)

3)In choice 'E' there is a 'comma and' so I thought an independent clause is what is required there.

incorrect analysis.
i posted the correct analysis of this sort of situation here:
post43518.html#p43518

Dear Ron and Stacy and all instructors, you all rock! Thank you so much for helping us.

Coming back to the option E, I think I understand pretty well about Ron's explanation on the dashes/commas, just want to confirm my understanding is indeed correct:

1. Dashes are alike with commas, but in such situation, if the modifier are broken apart from the main sentence by two dashes, then you can not substitute one of the dash with comma;

2. In the situation when a modifier is set apart by a comma/dash, there have two be "no comma/dash" or "two commas/dashes in front of and in the end of the modifier", unless the set apart modifier is the start or the end of the whole sentence. there were wrong examples where the modifier was only set apart by one comma.

3. An additional question about E, if the dash is changed to comma, will it be a run-on sentence? meaning it should be "; and they inhibit..."? Ron has said before try not to edit the wrong answer, but I really want to understand the run-on sentence better.

Your fans! and Thank you all.

[RonPurewal]

3. An additional question about E, if the dash is changed to comma, will it be a run-on sentence? meaning it should be "; and they inhibit..."?

no.
your version (with the semicolon) would be incorrect, since "and they..." isn't a sentence by itself.

[vikram4689]

E --- compounds ... and they (anything wrong with this structure?)

yes, something is indeed wrong.

at best, 'they' is an ambiguous pronoun that potentially refers either to 'antioxidants'/'compounds' or to 'health benefits'. at worst it refers to 'health benefits', the subject of the preceding sentence, by default. either way, you've got problems.

the other problem is that a single dash of the sort that sets off the descriptor in this problem is akin to a single comma: both set off an appositive phrase, which is NOT allowed to contain independent clauses (such as the one beginning with 'they' in choice e). choice d follows the rules here, as, after the dash, it contains only subordinate clauses.

...all kinds of trouble :(

A good analogy for these two-dash sentences is that dashes = parentheses. As such, typically you will only find examples or other subordinate clauses within them.

1) do above 2 quotes mean that NONE of single dash or double dashes can separate an Independent Clause from main clause.

2) Also following must be incorrect. are they ?
a) Time spent in prison can change your outlook - especially if you have a life sentence.
b) Jack was gentle, but persistent, with Carolyn - he would make her his wife.

[johnsonjz26]

The sentence intended to tell you that compounds are found... and compounds inhibit, if you choose E, the whole structure will be
found ..., and + sentence , obviously not parallel
In D, the 2 that indicates that inhibit refers to compounds, not other parts

[jlucero]

1) do above 2 quotes mean that NONE of single dash or double dashes can separate an Independent Clause from main clause.

2) Also following must be incorrect. are they ?
a) Time spent in prison can change your outlook - especially if you have a life sentence.
b) Jack was gentle, but persistent, with Carolyn - he would make her his wife.

1) Main clauses are independent clauses, so your question doesn't entirely make sense. However, you need to include the whole main clause of a sentence in the front half of clause with one dash, or outside of the double dashes.

2) I'd say both of these are incorrect because they are too related to one another to be separated by the dash. HOWEVER, the GMAT does not test your ability to know whether something should be broken up by a dash, a comma, or a parenthesis, so don't stress yourself out here.

[ecisn33186]

In (C) and (E) "found" is not a true verb, but a past participle, because "compounds" can't find something. A human or animal can find something--He found 3 dollars. Compare this to "The virus found in the heart and it is dangerous." This is wrong for two reasons: 1) Your making an independent clause parallel to a noun (virus) and its modifier (found). 2) Why do you have two subjects when they both refer to the same thing--virus; unless there is a good reason, and usually there is not, don't split a subject into two.

[RonPurewal]

In (C) and (E) "found" is not a true verb, but a past participle, because "compounds" can't find something. A human or animal can find something--He found 3 dollars. Compare this to "The virus found in the heart and it is dangerous." This is wrong for two reasons: 1) Your making an independent clause parallel to a noun (virus) and its modifier (found). 2) Why do you have two subjects when they both refer to the same thing--virus; unless there is a good reason, and usually there is not, don't split a subject into two.

To what, exactly, are you responding?

No one here has claimed that "found" is a verb.