British India - Who

[devenh]

Everything Ron and Stacy said makes sense as to why E is the right answer. However, "ruled as a colony" seems like a very subtle difference that one can easily miss on the real GMAT. Is there any other, more obvious reason why E is better than D?

When I got this question wrong, I remembered that "which" is mainly used for non-essential modifiers and "who" is used for essential modifiers. The reason I (incorrectly) picked D was because I thought the non-essential modifier was needed to describe that Britain "relinquished power". However, now I believe that the simple past tense word "relinquished" should be within an essential modifier since it is essential in describing Britain. Am I correct? Does my logic in picking E make sense? And, as a broad take away can I assume that if the simple past tense is within a modifier in any sentence that is using the past perfect then it needs to be part of an essential modifier as opposed to a non-essential modifier?

[RonPurewal]

Everything Ron and Stacy said makes sense as to why E is the right answer. However, "ruled as a colony" seems like a very subtle difference that one can easily miss on the real GMAT. Is there any other, more obvious reason why E is better than D?

in this problem, no.

i do have good news, though -- the upper-level problems on the real test will probably contain MORE errors than do some of the upper-level problems on our MGMAT exams.

this doesn't mean that the errors themselves are going to be any easier to detect; however, on the real test, it is comparatively less likely (though certainly not impossible) that you'll see a problem like this one, on which the entire problem boils down to a choice between two very similar choices that differ only by some idiomatic structure.

When I got this question wrong, I remembered that "which" is mainly used for non-essential modifiers...

yes...

and "who" is used for essential modifiers.

...no.

you are correct that "which" is used for nonessential modifiers -- in fact, "which" is used exclusively for nonessential modifiers. (if you're writing an essential modifier, you should use "that" instead of "which".)

however, "who" is used for both essential and nonessential modifiers.

The reason I (incorrectly) picked D was because I thought the non-essential modifier was needed to describe that Britain "relinquished power". However, now I believe that the simple past tense word "relinquished" should be within an essential modifier since it is essential in describing Britain. Am I correct? Does my logic in picking E make sense?

it appears that you may misunderstand the concept of essential/nonessential modifiers.

an essential modifier (i.e., WITHOUT the comma) is "essential" in the sense that its meaning is REQUIRED in the sentence; it NARROWS THE POSSIBILITIES for the preceding noun.

a nonessential modifier (WITH the comma) is "nonessential" in the sense that it just gives additional information, but the SENTENCE IS STILL TRUE if you remove it.

takeaway:
if you can't tell whether an essential or nonessential modifier is appropriate, ask yourself the following question:
IF I REMOVE THE MODIFIER COMPLETELY, AM I MAKING THE SAME STATEMENT (albeit with less descriptive detail)?

If YES --> you need a NONESSENTIAL MODIFIER (with comma)
If NO --> you need an ESSENTIAL MODIFIER (without comma)

here's an example:
Students who have scored 40 or higher on the Wonderlic test will receive academic scholarships.
--> try removing it: "Students will receive academic scholarships". whoa, that's totally different.
therefore, we need an essential modifier here.

in this sentence:
if you remove the modifier from (e), you get
Before independence in 1947, India had been a colony of the British.
this is still totally true; it just doesn't give as much descriptive information.
therefore, you need a NONESSENTIAL modifier here.

hope that helps.

And, as a broad take away can I assume that if the simple past tense is within a modifier in any sentence that is using the past perfect then it needs to be part of an essential modifier as opposed to a non-essential modifier?

nope.

this distinction has nothing to do with tense; it's solely a matter of meaning (see above).

[devenh]

Thanks Ron! I really appreciate your response, you and the rest of the MGMAT staff are all great teachers!

[StaceyKoprince]

you're welcome!

[NewSc2]

Just wanted to chime in. I initially penciled in E, but after comparing "who vs. which" at the end of both D and E, I went with "which," because I'd remembered that who was only supposed to modify people ("whom" can modify people or things).

The book seems pretty adamant about this distinction. It stuck out pretty clearly in my mind, and fooled me on that question. You guys may want to include such an example (of "British" referring to people) on your next revision. If I remember correctly, a company or town was quoted as not being a person. I can see why "British" would refer to people and a company not, but they felt the same in my mind during this question.

[kushagra452]

Isn't the use of "its" in the answer choices also wrong? Its is a possessive pronoun which does not have any antecedent. Hence, one can eliminate choices (A) and (C) based on this observation.

Am I right?

Thanks

[tim]

A possessive pronoun can have an object as an antecedent, and in this case the proper object is India, so that rules out A but not C..

"British" is short for "British people" in this case, so it is proper to use "who". That's not to say that D is wrong for that reason, because "Britain" as a country would take a "which"..

[lastavalon]

I am convinced with the OA and the related reasoning

However, I feel option B cannot be discarded because of the modifier issue.
option B says ,"Before Independence in 1947" and NOT "Before its independence in 1947" . These 2 modifiers are different and option B is correct as Independence is just an event and is not linked to Britain or India

Even MGMAT in its explanation says

(B) Britain should not be the recipient of the modifier "Before its independence."

It might be a typo.

not really. even without the "its", this modifier still VERY strongly indicates that the independence refers to britain, not india.
if you don't see this, try replacing "britain" and "india" with the names of two fictitious nations, such as "esteria" and "burdistan". with those fictitious names in there, it should be easier to see the default meaning of the modifier.

Really?? "before independence" relates to an event called independence, without indicating in any sort of way that it is the independence of Britain. You focus on the order of the words (Britain before India) to say that but the meaning of the whole sentence leaves NO DOUBT about the fact that we're talking about India's independence... I would agree if there was a "its" in the modifier.
Am I really wrong?

The explanation based on the use of fictitious nation is just nonsense and not convincing AT ALL! It just makes me laugh! :)

And anyway, you should still adjust the typo mistake in the test for answer B...

Thanks for your help (I hate to get questions wrong and not an satisfying explanation...)

[tim]

well, you're not going to get satisfying explanations if you choose to laugh at Ron's excellent explanation rather than taking a close look at how useful the analogy is..

i'm also going to agree with Ron that it is very clear from the context of the sentence whose independence we're talking about. again, try to understand that rather than just being contrary, and you'll get a lot more out of this exercise..

[rohini.gangapuram]

Hi Ron,

just finished my CAT and as others picked up D i too went for it. Though your explanations have been very good i still have some doubt

I have read posts in the past where if 2 answers are correct gramatically we normally go with the original sentence. thats what i did here. original sentence says india was ruled as a colony. so i went with D.

now you said in the above posts it doesnt convey clear meaning. i looked at it as "india is not a colony, its a country, British ruled india as a colony" . infact British were famous for their colonail rule, isnt it? i knw this is too much of history thinking into an SC prb but my point is i went with the original sentence and chose D. and im sure i would have done the same in real time exam.

its better just not to blindly go wth the original sentence when stuck between 2 options?(provided the original doesnt have grammar issues?)

[tim]

there is nothing sacred about the original sentence. if two or more choices are grammatically correct, you look at the meaning. i'll also echo what Ron says all the time, which is that you will get nowhere expressing doubts about the correct answers. don't question correct answers; instead, strive to understand why they're correct..