Recently documented examples of neurogenesis

[Luci]

Here there are many answer that are parallel, how to choose among all of them? A, C didnt look like correct at all, and I didnt like D as well because it talks about "the brain growth" as if it was some concrete growth... But between B and E i didnt know how to choose... I understand that an example cannot include a mice (it´s obvious ;-p) but can it include a brain growth???

Thanks

[StaceyKoprince]

Tough one. "examples of neurogenesis include" - so the examples should lead off with whatever the actual thing is that indicated neurogenesis. The mice aren't the example - the example is the brain growth. That eliminates B and C. A also breaks parallelism.

And the other thing wrong with A, B, C and D is "when placed in a stimulating environment" - it sounds like they are referring only to the time that the mice are in the stimulating environment - but the brain growth is permanent. It doesn't shrink back down once the mice are no longer in the stimulating environment. Ditto for the increase in neurons in the canaries.

[Hei]

Original question:
Recently documented examples of neurogenesis, the production of new brain cells, include the brain growing in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or neurons increasing in canaries that learn new songs.

(A) the brain growing in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or neurons increasing in canaries that
(B) mice whose brains grow when they are placed in a stimulating environment or canaries whose neurons increase when they
(C) mice's brains that grow when they are placed in a stimulating environment or canaries' neurons that increase when they
(D) the brain growth in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or the increase in canaries' neurons when they
(E) brain growth in mice that are placed in a stimulating environment or an increase in neurons in canaries that

The OA is E.
However, I think that "or" should be "and" right?
examples....include X or Y.
Isn't it weird?
Or it is okay to use "or" after "include"?

[enginpasa1]

IS IT RIGHT TO SAY THAT CHOICE B, C, & D HAVE AN AMBIGOUS "THEY"?

[RonPurewal]

IS IT RIGHT TO SAY THAT CHOICE B, C, & D HAVE AN AMBIGOUS "THEY"?

for choices b and c, yes.
for choice d, no, but do note that it violates 'possessive poison', the rule that everyone loves to hate.

[aaa]

Why are "brain growth" and "an increase in neurons" parallel? Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Why are "brain growth" and "an increase in neurons" parallel? Thanks

first, they're logically parallel; that's probably obvious.
note that, true to form, the central noun of the first part is "growth" (not "mice", which disqualifies some of the earlier answer choices), and the central noun of the second part is "increase".

i will assume that you're wondering why the first part doesn't look more like the second part, i.e., why it doesn't say something along the lines of "growth in the brains of..."
this is because "brain growth" is much, much less wordy than that sort of alternative. and, unfortunately, there's really no way to write "an increase in neurons" in the form ADJ NOUN (as is done with "brain growth"), so that's about as parallel as you're going to get.

by the way, i really, really hate this question. i don't think "or" has any business being in this sentence; it should clearly be "and", because both of these are recently documented examples of neurogenesis.
i don't understand how they can write "or" with a straight face.
but, as we've said so many times on here, it's their playground, and they make the rules.

[Champion]

Whats wrong with answer choice D?

Is "that" used to indicate specific canaries or mice?

[RonPurewal]

Whats wrong with answer choice D?

Is "that" used to indicate specific canaries or mice?

already addressed by stacey in the second post of the thread (first response to the original post).

[cesar.rodriguez.blanco]

Whats wrong with answer choice D?

Is "that" used to indicate specific canaries or mice?

already addressed by stacey in the second post of the thread (first response to the original post).

Hi Ron.
I do not understand the difference between D ("mice when") and E ("mice that").
In both cases, when/that are modifying mice.
Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Whats wrong with answer choice D?

Is "that" used to indicate specific canaries or mice?

already addressed by stacey in the second post of the thread (first response to the original post).

Hi Ron.
I do not understand the difference between D ("mice when") and E ("mice that").
In both cases, when/that are modifying mice.
Thanks

if you say "when + PAST PARTICIPLE", then this automatically applies to the SUBJECT of the clause to which it's attached.

if i say
iron accumulates rust when submerged in water
then it's the iron, not the rust, that's submerged in water.

this strikes choice (d), since the SUBJECT is "recently documented examples", not "mice" as required.

[vineetbatra]

Ron,

Can you please explain why they is ambiguous in B and C, and not in D, they is referring to mice and Canaries respectively in B & C.

[RonPurewal]

Ron,

Can you please explain why they is ambiguous in B and C, and not in D, they is referring to mice and Canaries respectively in B & C.

"they" is totally wrong in (d). it would automatically refer to "neurons", since "canaries' " is possessive and therefore ineligible to be the referent.

similarly, (c) has incorrect pronouns (the first "they" would automatically be "brains", and the second would automatically be "neurons").

(b) has ambiguous pronouns.

i'm not sure exactly what question you're trying to ask.

[herogmat]

if you say "when + PAST PARTICIPLE", then this automatically applies to the SUBJECT of the clause to which it's attached.

if i say
iron accumulates rust when submerged in water
then it's the iron, not the rust, that's submerged in water.

this strikes choice (d), since the SUBJECT is "recently documented examples", not "mice" as required.

Ron,
is this a rule that when + PAST PARTICIPLE should always apply to the SUBJECT. I can think of examples where it can easily be applied to the OBJECT.
e.g : He likes the taste of chicken when roasted.
It should depend on the context. I have to disagree with you that "when placed in ... environment" is referring to "Recently documented examples of neurogenesis". I believe it is correctly associated with mice but have other problems as suggested by Stacey at the top.
Your view please.

[RonPurewal]

Ron,
is this a rule that when + PAST PARTICIPLE should always applie to the SUBJECT. I can think of examples where it can easily be applied to the OBJECT.
e.g : He likes the taste of chicken when roasted.

"easily", hmm.

nope, that's wrong -- that sentence would mean that this man likes the taste of chicken when he is roasted.
i suppose that's not altogether implausible if this man really likes to go out in the sun and get a tan, but that's clearly not your intended meaning.

It should depend on the context.

...but it doesn't.

you are making a really serious mistake: the mistake of confusing SPOKEN-language conventions with WRITTEN-language conventions.
in spoken language, there are very few hard and fast rules, and "common sense" and "context" rule the day, because people have sufficient intuition to overcome bad grammar in interpreting sentences.
in a written language, on the other hand, modifiers have extremely narrowly circumscribed rules that determine their usage. to determine whether a written modifier is correct, you compare its contextual meaning (which is discoverable by "common sense") with the meaning that it is assigned by the grammatical rules. if those two meanings clash -- as in the sentence "he likes the taste of chicken when roasted" -- then the sentence is incorrect, even though it would be totally fine in spoken language.

I have to disagree with you that "when placed in ... environment" is referring to "Recently documented examples of neurogenesis". I believe it is correctly associated with mice but have other problems as suggested by Stacey at the top.
Your view please.

you already know my view; it's the post to which you were responding!

in any case, you are certainly welcome to disagree with me, but gmac is going to be on my side of this one. proceed accordingly.