Prep Questions - Trans World Entertainment Corporation

[RonPurewal]

basically, there are 2 possibilities:

1/
the sentence is written from the present point of view:
the company has announced (or, just announced) ... that it is closing (or will close) the stores ... that have accounted for the poor sales figures

2/
the sentence is written from the point of view of the (past) announcement:
the company announced (some time ago) ... that it was closing (or would be closing) the stores ... that accounted for the poor sales figures


the good news is that verb tenses are an extremely minor topic on the gmat.

first, they aren't tested very often to begin with; second, if they are tested, they're usually tested in conjunction with more major topics -- so, if you can spot what else is wrong with the sentence, then you're off the hook even if you don't understand the tenses all that well.

[niharika.jain03]

This question can be solved by elimination.

A: "they" does not have a clear antecedent. The subject is the main modifying clause is "sales" and not stores.

B: "which" is not the ideal relative pronoun as "that" would be preferred. Also the tense "closing" is incorrect.

C: Sounds decent.

D: wordy, weird, tense, everything

E: the announcement was about closing down not having poor sales.

[jlucero]

This question can be solved by elimination.

A: "they" does not have a clear antecedent. The subject is the main modifying clause is "sales" and not stores.

B: "which" is not the ideal relative pronoun as "that" would be preferred. Also the tense "closing" is incorrect.

C: Sounds decent.

D: wordy, weird, tense, everything

E: the announcement was about closing down not having poor sales.

Two things:

B) "that" would be incorrect. We are not closing 1/4 of the stores that accounted for bad sales. We are closing 1/4 of all stores; the reason is that we have had bad sales.

C) sounds decent is not the same as having no grammatical errors. Lots of answer choices sound decent but are wrong.

[jyothi h]

Hi Ron/Stacey,

Isn't there also a meaning issue with C?

The original sentence tries to convey a meaning that "one-fourth of the stores have demonstrated poor sales and those stores would be closed".

Choice C tends to state that "one-fourth of the stores would be closed because the company demontrated poor sales".

In choice C, there is no mention that only those stores that demonstrated poor sales would be closed.

Thanks.

I have the same doubt . Option C changes the intended meaning as mentioned in the above post. I picked option A , assuming , the pronoun ambiguity would be ok , cos it makes more sense to say " stores will be closed" , as opposed to "sales will be closed". I obviously missed out something.
would be glad if you can clarify/correct me on this .

[jlucero]

Hi Ron/Stacey,

Isn't there also a meaning issue with C?

The original sentence tries to convey a meaning that "one-fourth of the stores have demonstrated poor sales and those stores would be closed".

Choice C tends to state that "one-fourth of the stores would be closed because the company demontrated poor sales".

In choice C, there is no mention that only those stores that demonstrated poor sales would be closed.

Thanks.

I have the same doubt . Option C changes the intended meaning as mentioned in the above post. I picked option A , assuming , the pronoun ambiguity would be ok , cos it makes more sense to say " stores will be closed" , as opposed to "sales will be closed". I obviously missed out something.
would be glad if you can clarify/correct me on this .

The intended meaning is the meaning of the correct answer. You might have to determine what the correct meaning is, but the original meaning never guarantees the correct meaning. In this case, C's meaning makes logical sense and is the only one with no grammatical issues. If you want another reason to eliminate A (besides the ambiguous pronoun, that really should refer back to the subject of the clause and not a noun hidden away in back-to-back prepositions):

Trans World Entertainment Corporation, which owns the RecordTown and Saturday Matinee retail chains, announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

Trans World Entertainment Corporation announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

X announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

X announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, stores will be closed.

The simple pronoun here doesn't carry with it all the descriptive elements surrounding it. This sentence says that stores will be closed, but doesn't state which ones. Another ambiguous element in A. Here's another example:

Since half of my shirts are ripped, I will throw them away. (all shirts)
Since half of my shirts are ripped, I will throw those ones away. (those shirts)

[zhouyj1089]

Hi Ron/Stacey,

Isn't there also a meaning issue with C?

The original sentence tries to convey a meaning that "one-fourth of the stores have demonstrated poor sales and those stores would be closed".

Choice C tends to state that "one-fourth of the stores would be closed because the company demontrated poor sales".

In choice C, there is no mention that only those stores that demonstrated poor sales would be closed.

Thanks.

I have the same doubt . Option C changes the intended meaning as mentioned in the above post. I picked option A , assuming , the pronoun ambiguity would be ok , cos it makes more sense to say " stores will be closed" , as opposed to "sales will be closed". I obviously missed out something.
would be glad if you can clarify/correct me on this .

The intended meaning is the meaning of the correct answer. You might have to determine what the correct meaning is, but the original meaning never guarantees the correct meaning. In this case, C's meaning makes logical sense and is the only one with no grammatical issues. If you want another reason to eliminate A (besides the ambiguous pronoun, that really should refer back to the subject of the clause and not a noun hidden away in back-to-back prepositions):

Trans World Entertainment Corporation, which owns the RecordTown and Saturday Matinee retail chains, announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

Trans World Entertainment Corporation announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

X announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, they will be closed.

X announced that since sales of up to one-fourth of its stores are poor, stores will be closed.

The simple pronoun here doesn't carry with it all the descriptive elements surrounding it. This sentence says that stores will be closed, but doesn't state which ones. Another ambiguous element in A. Here's another example:

Since half of my shirts are ripped, I will throw them away. (all shirts)
Since half of my shirts are ripped, I will throw those ones away. (those shirts)

Hi Instructors,

I have a question about the pronoun, "they", in choice A.

I think the problem here is that "they" doesn't have a proper antecedent rather than that its antecedent is ambiguous.

I learned, from Manhattan 5th, that "they", "them", "their" must refer to the SAME plural antecedent (with all descriptive elements surrounding it). So, in choice A, "they" would refer to "sales of up to one-fourth of its stores". However, the sentence, " 'sales of ...' will be closed.", doesn't make any sense. Therefore, "they" doesn't have a proper antecedent.

Please correct me if I am wrong!
Thanks a lot!!

[RonPurewal]

So, in choice A, "they" would refer to "sales of up to one-fourth of its stores". However, the sentence, " 'sales of ...' will be closed.", doesn't make any sense. Therefore, "they" doesn't have a proper antecedent.

Please correct me if I am wrong!
Thanks a lot!!

Nope.

If the pronoun were intended to refer to "sales", then, yes, it would have to refer specifically to "sales of xxxxx". But that doesn't preclude the pronoun from referring just to the stores.

Look at #107 in OG 13. If you apply the same principle there, you'll eliminate the correct answer because you think "they" has to be "fixed costs".
Oops.

[zhouyj1089]

So, in choice A, "they" would refer to "sales of up to one-fourth of its stores". However, the sentence, " 'sales of ...' will be closed.", doesn't make any sense. Therefore, "they" doesn't have a proper antecedent.

Please correct me if I am wrong!
Thanks a lot!!

Nope.

If the pronoun were intended to refer to "sales", then, yes, it would have to refer specifically to "sales of xxxxx". But that doesn't preclude the pronoun from referring just to the stores.

Look at #107 in OG 13. If you apply the same principle there, you'll eliminate the correct answer because you think "they" has to be "fixed costs".
Oops.

I see.

I was trying to summarize the rule/logic of deciding whether there is a ambiguous pronoun, and I'm a little confused now because if I use these rules together, it seems like they may conflict to each other.

for example, "they" has to refer to exactly same noun in sentence, but you just gave me an example to prove I was wrong. But, if "they" can refer to any plural noun in sentence, then this rule obeys the previous rule that " 'they' has to refer to exactly same noun in sentence".

--------
So I change a way to summarize it. Please see it below.

IF the possible antecedent is the noun to which pronoun is intended to refer, then:
STEP1. to see will the antecedent still make sense surrounded by all descriptive elements.

example:
as you said in above post:

If the pronoun were intended to refer to "sales", then, yes, it would have to refer specifically to "sales of xxxxx".

IF other words in sentence, except the one to which pronoun is intended to refer, can be possible antecedents, then I need to do following steps:

Step1:
Because (1) "It", "one" can refer to any singular noun in the sentence.
(2)"they", "them", and "their" can refer to any plural noun in the sentence.
If there are more than one possible antecedents, it is a ambiguous pronoun.

example:
1) In this question, although pronoun "they" is intended to refer to "stores", "sales of xxx" can also grammatically be the antecedent of pronoun "they". There are two possible antecedents; therefore, choice A has a problem of ambiguity.
2) Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.
In this case, "it", a pronoun that refers to same singular noun, is intended to refer to "sloth", but "arm" and "Puerto Rico" could also be it's possible antecedent. So that, the reference of "it" is ambiguous.

Step2: If there is a problem of ambiguity, then I need to remember that "Not all ambiguous pronouns are incorrect."

example:
#107 in OG 13, "they" is intended to refer to "nuclear plants", but can also grammatically refers to "other types of power plants"; so that, it is ambiguous as well. However, because all choices have either the word "they" or the word "them, ambiguity can't be the reason to eliminate wrong answers.

Step3. If ambiguity can't be a reason to eliminate a choice, I need to make sure that
1) the possible antecedent of "they"/"them"/"their" is plural and wether the possible antecedent of "it"/"one" is singular.

example:
Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.
Because "it" must refer to same noun, "it", in this case, would grammatically refer to "fossils(plural) of the arm of a sloth", which makes no sense.

--------
Am i doing it in a right way?

I'm so sorry for this long post...
Thank you very much for your time and patience. I very appreciate!

[RonPurewal]

Step2: If there is a problem of ambiguity, then I need to remember that "Not all ambiguous pronouns are incorrect."

^^ This is the only thing you have to know.

"Pronoun ambiguity" is a non-thing on this test. No official problem will ever depend on it.

Feel free to ignore it.

[zhouyj1089]

Got it. Thanks so much, Ron!!

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

About 10% of your success in SC will come from knowing how things work. The other 90% will come from not making things more complicated than they actually are.

[zhouyj1089]

You're welcome.

About 10% of your success in SC will come from knowing how things work. The other 90% will come from not making things more complicated than they actually are.

Ron, thank you so much for giving such wise suggestion! I will keep in mind.

[RonPurewal]

Great.

One of the reasons I do well on these questions is that my brain simply can't process things that are complicated. As soon as something isn't simple, my brain basically shuts off.
Ironically, that's a strength on a test like the GMAT. Try to emulate it: If something seems complicated, step back and see whether you can make it simple.

[zhouyj1089]

Great.

One of the reasons I do well on these questions is that my brain simply can't process things that are complicated. As soon as something isn't simple, my brain basically shuts off.
Ironically, that's a strength on a test like the GMAT. Try to emulate it: If something seems complicated, step back and see whether you can make it simple.

Thank you so much for sharing those extremely meaningful and helpful tips.
I learn things from you every day. Thank you!
I used to think those choices, which may "appear simple" but are logically complicated, are correct answer for two reasons: first, i assume that GMAC are composed of people who are extremely smart and have the brain that can process complicated things, and they try to give test-takers a hard time. :p; second, the rule of GMAT SC is to choose the one that "follows the professional American English grammar rules". In real world, "professional" things usually appear "complicated". Now, I know I'm wrong.
Since I am not a native English speaker, sometime it is hard for me to find out the right answer, which conveys clearer meaning, has simpler construction, and is grammatically correct. There are way more things to learn. Fighting!

[RonPurewal]

Thank you so much for sharing those extremely meaningful and helpful tips.
I learn things from you every day. Thank you!
I used to think those choices, which may "appear simple" but are logically complicated, are correct answer for two reasons: first, i assume that GMAC are composed of people who are extremely smart and have the brain that can process complicated things, and they try to give test-takers a hard time.

Their goal is to create an exam that requires sharp thinking, but not specialized thinking.

In real world, "professional" things usually appear "complicated".

Only to people who don't know what they mean. Once you have the requisite knowledge, "professional" things are generally pretty simple, too.

The difference here is that the GMAT has relatively little "requisite knowledge".