simple past and past perfect

[chughbrajesh]

In 1713, Alexander Pope began his translation of the Illiad, a work that, taking him seven years until completion, and that literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced the greatest translation in any language.

A. his translation of the Illiad, a work that, taking him seven years until completion, and that literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced
B. his translation of the Illiad, a work that took him seven years to complete and that literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced
C. his translation of the Illiad, a work that had taken seven years to complete and that literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced it is
D. translating the Illiad, a work that took seven years until completion and that literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced it as
E. translating the Illiad, a work that had taken seven years to complete and literary critic Samuel Johnson, Pope’s contemporary, pronounced it

Does not B have a parallelism issue? next to 'that' is a verb 'took' then second that we have a modifier then later shows up the verb at the end?

[RonPurewal]

Do not question official correct answers!

* Do not ask "Is [this official correct answer] correct?" The answer is always yes. Don't waste your time.

* Do not ask "Is [this official correct answer] wrong?" The answer is always no. Don't waste your time.

If you want to actually learn from these problems"”presumably the goal here"”then you have to retire the idea that the official answers might be wrong. Accept that they're correct, and learn from them.

[RonPurewal]

In choice B there are two modifiers, "that took him 7 years to complete" and "that Samuel Johnson pronounced xxxx". Both modifiers describe "work", so they are parallel.

The word "that" is not just repeated for clarity; the repetition is actually necessary.
The first "that" is the subject of "took him 7 years...", while the second "that" is the object of "Samuel Johnson pronounced...". So, they are essentially different types of words, even though they are both identical in appearance ("that").

next to 'that' is a verb 'took' then second that we have a modifier then later shows up the verb at the end?

I don't actually understand what you're asking here.

[cshen02]

i interpret "phenomenon" to modify "increase", which is entirely consistent with our idea of an appositive modifying a noun..

Hi,

I read that a noun modifier should touch the noun being modified. However, in the sentence under question, "phenomenon" touches "prescription drugs" not "increase", is "phenomenon" a vague modifier?
Is there any general rule for an appositive that modifies a complex noun (i.e., X of Y, noun modified by another noun)?
Would anyone share some thoughts here?

Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

This kind of modifier can do more than one thing.

* It can describe the noun that comes before.
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a predator that could devour the bird at any time. (A plover is a kind of bird.)
Here, "a predator" is playing the same role as "which" would. The difference is that it adds extra information: it's the first mention that the alligator is a predator.

* It can also describe the entire idea of the preceding sentence. (There's no need to nail down exactly what it modifies in this case; it modifies the entire sentence.)
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a relationship that benefits both animals.
Here, we're describing the entire sentence. The plover benefits by getting food; the alligator, by getting free dental care.

[RonPurewal]

To decide which of those uses is in play"”as for any other construction with multiple uses"”you have to use a bit of common sense, along with the context of the sentence.

Here, it's clear that "a phenomenon" describes the entire idea of the preceding sentence. So, that's how it works.

[DanielaA678]

Hi Ron,

Why the verb form used in the sentence is it not -critics-? Whether is the the work or the Pope who critics Samuel Johnson, shouldn´t it be the third person of -to critic-?

Thank you!!!

[RonPurewal]

in this sentence, "critic" is a noun. (a "literary critic" is someone who reviews literature professionally.)

[GeorgiaF924]

A modifier won't refer to something in a prepositional phrase.

Sorry, Jamie, according to OG #19 (13 EDITION), this conclusion may be wrong.
the correct sentence is "The exploits of N.B, a pioneer journalist, included....."

[RonPurewal]

you're correct; that's not a rule.

...also, even if there were such a rule, the gmat would not test it.
this is not a test of weird subtleties; it's a test of things that are pretty much ubiquitous themes in the english language. you will not have to know anything so specialized.
so, if your head currently contains anything like "thing 'X' in construction 'Y' in circumstance 'Z' can't work with thing 'A' in construction 'B' under circumstance 'C' "... then, nope. it's junk. throw it out.

[JasonH713]

This kind of modifier can do more than one thing.

* It can describe the noun that comes before.
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a predator that could devour the bird at any time. (A plover is a kind of bird.)
Here, "a predator" is playing the same role as "which" would. The difference is that it adds extra information: it's the first mention that the alligator is a predator.

* It can also describe the entire idea of the preceding sentence. (There's no need to nail down exactly what it modifies in this case; it modifies the entire sentence.)
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a relationship that benefits both animals.
Here, we're describing the entire sentence. The plover benefits by getting food; the alligator, by getting free dental care.

Does this mean the "phenomenon that..." here works as an absolute phrase which does not necessarily modify the noun preceding it but can refer to the whole sentence or the idea?

[RonPurewal]

Does this mean the "phenomenon that..." here works as an absolute phrase which does not necessarily modify the noun preceding it but can refer to the whole sentence or the idea?

i can't tell whether your query is about the blue thing or about the pink thing.

blue:
• i don't know whether this is the correct terminology.
• for someone taking the gmat exam, the terminology has no possible benefit anyway.

pink:
this is essentially the content of the post you quoted above. so, yes.

[RichaChampion]

This kind of modifier can do more than one thing.

* It can describe the noun that comes before.
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a predator that could devour the bird at any time. (A plover is a kind of bird.)
Here, "a predator" is playing the same role as "which" would. The difference is that it adds extra information: it's the first mention that the alligator is a predator.

* It can also describe the entire idea of the preceding sentence. (There's no need to nail down exactly what it modifies in this case; it modifies the entire sentence.)
The plover feeds by cleaning bits of food out of the mouth of the alligator, a relationship that benefits both animals.
Here, we're describing the entire sentence. The plover benefits by getting food; the alligator, by getting free dental care.

___________________________________


Noun+Noun Modifier can act as Appositive(Modifying Closest Noun) or Absolute Phrase(Modifying entire Clause that is preceded) depending upon the situation.


Please tell me sir,

began his translation/began translating of the Iliad, a work

Now Please help me -

As soon as began his translation changes to began translating a work Modification capacity changes How?

In 1713, Alexander Pope began his translation of the Iliad, a work .........

In 1713, Alexander Pope began translating of the Iliad, a work ................

At Subtle Level what has happened that later is wrong?

[RonPurewal]

At Subtle Level...

as soon as this ^^ enters your mind...
...STOP
...go find something easier / more straightforward.

there WILL be something easier.

think:
• what is the 'work' described in the modifier?
• one of the sentences actually mentions that work.
• the other one doesn't.

since this is an OG problem, there will be no more discussion of it here. (i'm being indulgent even by discussing it to this extent.)

[RonPurewal]

since this problem is from OG, the thread is now locked.