* leaching, the recovery of copper

[RonPurewal]

d. The history of the automobile typically begins as early as 1769. ( or it could be "at" 1769) so why we are using as early as here ?

as written, this sentence is nonsense. ("typically" = "in most cases"; this is obviously not something that has happened many times).

the following sentence, on the other hand, is sensible:
The history of the automobile is typically traced back as early as 1769.
(we can sensibly use "typically" for "is traced...", to describe a judgment made by most historians of the automobile.)

like the sentence about the church council (above), this sentence could have either of two meanings ("WHOA that's early" or "that date or possibly later"), depending on additional context.

[RonPurewal]

most importantly, we have now progressed far beyond anything that would ever possibly be tested on the gmat exam (you'll never have to know idiomatic usages with anywhere near this degree of specificity).

[Navneet]

It was a spectacular reply

I was stuck on proper usage of "as early as" and spend quite some time on internet, searching sites like nytimes.

But " "as early as X" = "at X or later". ("by X", by contrast, means "at X or possibly earlier".)" was the missing link, that I was searching for.

Thanks Ron

[RonPurewal]

you may already have the correct intuition for certain similar phrases.

e.g., these fruits can weigh as much as 20 pounds each --> you may already know that this means "up to 20 pounds" (≤20). if so, the analogy here should be clear.

[Navneet]

Thanks Ron

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[thanghnvn]

[quote="rx_11"]leaching, the recovery of copper from the drainage water of mines, as a method of the extraction of minerals, it was well established as early as the eighteenth century, but until about 25 years ago miners did not realize that bacteria taken an active part in the process.

(A) as a method of the extraction of minerals, it was well established
(B) as a method of the extraction of minerals well established
(C) was a well-established method of mineral extraction
(D) was a well-established method of extracting mineral that was
(E) had been a method of mineral extraction, well established

Pls help,
in the pattern
until+point of time+main clause
the verb in main clause is in past tense? why dose the verb not in past perfect tense?

[tim]

I don't want to sound trite, but the reason is because that's the rule on the GMAT. :) If it's not obvious to you that this is the correct form, just memorize this as a rule.

[gbyhats]

Hi Dear Manhattan Instructors :)

Speaking of essential modifier:

May I know is present participles or past participles can be made legit essential modifiers as "having done" in GMAT SC?

e.g.

1. Kids having finished playing are taking shower.

2. Software having shown a positive market response are almost best sellers.

3. That red book having been read by us is the best guide that ManhattanGMAT ever written.

[benjamindian]

Source: GMAT prep.

Moreover, could u explain what's wrong with E?

inappropriate tense.
if the past perfect is used to describe a state or description of something (as opposed to an action verb), it should generally be used to describe a state/description that is no longer the case. since leaching is presumably still an extraction method (this is not the sort of thing that is subject to change), the past perfect is inappropriate.
]

Hi RON,

What do you mean by "if the past perfect is used to describe a state or description of something (as opposed to an action verb), it should generally be used to describe a state/description that is no longer the case."?

Also, why is the past perfect tense wrong in the following slightly modified sentence?

A 1279 agreement reduced the amount of xxx that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the xxx Lakes.

The explanation given seems to suggest that the past perfect tense indicates the dumping stopped after 1972. Why/how can the past perfect tense indicate that meaning?

There have been 402 replies regarding that tense issue on another forum but still no one seems to explain it clearly why the tense is wrong. Hope you can shed some light on it! Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

Hi RON,

What do you mean by "if the past perfect is used to describe a state or description of something (as opposed to an action verb), it should generally be used to describe a state/description that is no longer the case."?

it's not possible to state that in simpler terms, so here are some examples.

Sarah stared at the indentation in the carpet where the television stood.
--> the TV was there, causing an indentation in the carpet, when sarah looked.

Sarah stared at the indentation in the carpet where the television had stood.
--> the TV was no longer there when sarah looked, but it had left a "footprint" in the carpet.

The work program hired workers who were incarcerated.
--> they hired prisoners.

The work program hired workers who had been incarcerated.
--> they hired ex-convicts.

[RonPurewal]

Also, why is the past perfect tense wrong in the following slightly modified sentence?

A 1279 agreement reduced the amount of xxx that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the xxx Lakes.

consider:

I just improved my GMAT score.
--> perfectly reasonable sentence ("my GMAT score", which presumably refers to one's best score, is something that can evolve over time)

I just improved my first GMAT score.
--> this is impossible, because my first score is a historical value that can't change.

Sam's views on poverty were changed by his work.
--> perfectly reasonable; one's views can evolve.

Sam's former views on poverty were changed by his work.
--> impossible; one can't change one's prior views. whatever they were, they were.

The views Sam had held on poverty were changed by his work.
--> impossible for the same reason.
"the views sam had held" means the same as "sam's former views". (conveniently, this is explained in the post right before this one.)

[gbyhats]

Hi Dear Ron :)

Regarding to your second post:

consider:

I just improved my GMAT score.
--> perfectly reasonable sentence ("my GMAT score", which presumably refers to one's best score, is something that can evolve over time)

I just improved my first GMAT score.
--> this is impossible, because my first score is a historical value that can't change.

So what you mean is that you can not really "reduced" "amount of xxx that municipalities had been allowed to dump"?

Because this is impossible: "amount of xxx that municipalities had been allowed to dump" is a historical value that can't change (aka. "reduced")

[RonPurewal]

that's the idea.

[benjamindian]

Thank you, Ron! Somehow, I didn't receive notification for your awesome replies!