Until Antoine Lavoisier proved otherwise...

[sam.railkar]

I am not clear about the use of past-perfect here. Isn't "Until" telling you the time sequence clearly? Why do we need past-perfect?

[RonPurewal]

I am not clear about the use of past-perfect here. Isn't "Until" telling you the time sequence clearly? Why do we need past-perfect?

you're still obligated to use the tense that is dictated by the context of the problem, even if the time cues ore otherwise "obvious".

this problem still features a condition that persisted up until a definite point in the past (i.e., the point at which lavoisier proved X).
that's the context in which we use the past perfect.
therefore, the past perfect is the CORRECT tense. other tenses are INCORRECT.
what other tense would you use?

[gs.abhinav]

Ron,

Beg your pardon but don't you think the usage of the relative pronoun 'whose' is incorrect in this sentence. I have usually seen that 'whose' modifies people and sometimes places but I have never seen it modify an object like in this question.

Would you be so kind to clarify the acceptable style in the GMAT.

Many thanks.

[tim]

Hi GS,
i guess the best thing would be to ask you what word you would use in place of "whose". Considering there are no other ways to express this concept without using way more words, "whose" is definitely the most economical choice. Because of this, the GMAT has apparently concluded that in such cases "whose" can be used to refer even to things without personhood..

[gmat.acer]

I am not clear about the use of past-perfect here. Isn't "Until" telling you the time sequence clearly? Why do we need past-perfect?

you're still obligated to use the tense that is dictated by the context of the problem, even if the time cues ore otherwise "obvious".

this problem still features a condition that persisted up until a definite point in the past (i.e., the point at which lavoisier proved X).
that's the context in which we use the past perfect.
therefore, the past perfect is the CORRECT tense. other tenses are INCORRECT.
what other tense would you use?

As per 'Dinosaur' example in the study guide and 'war' example (http://www.beatthegmat.com/timmy-war-t72033.html) that Tommy W. covered in one of the study halls, I learnt that if the timing of the actions in the sentence is clear from the context we should not change tense and should stick with simple tenses.

So would following choice that uses simple past instead of past perfect be correct?

Until Antoine Lavoisier proved otherwise in the eighteenth century, many scientists believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood.

If its incorrect, could you please explain why? Why/how the word 'Until' fails to show that scientist's belief persisted only until AL proved it wrong?

[jnelson0612]

Your sentence looks correct to me. Nice work!

[thanghnvn]

thank you manhantan experts, anh students.

the persons had believed the thing until 1900 year

it was not 1900 that persons believed the thing

are both correct sentenses. The first is proved by this gmatprep question, the second by question 3 og12 (use pdf of og12 to quickly find the question , using computer)

pls explain the use of simple past, not past perfect in the second sentence.

Thank you.

[jnelson0612]

thank you manhantan experts, anh students.

the persons had believed the thing until 1900 year

it was not 1900 that persons believed the thing

are both correct sentenses. The first is proved by this gmatprep question, the second by question 3 og12 (use pdf of og12 to quickly find the question , using computer)

pls explain the use of simple past, not past perfect in the second sentence.

Thank you.

The first one is grammatically correct but I'd like to make it a bit clearer, because the meaning is shaky right now. For example:
"I believed that I could fly until 1978." This means that I believed that I could fly, but only until 1978.

A better sentence would be:
"Until 1978, I believed that I could fly". This meaning is clear and correct.

As for the second one, you have omitted a word. It should be something like this:
"It was not UNTIL 1600 that people believed that the earth was round".

As long as the "until" is added, this sentence is correct too.

The second sentence does not contain past perfect. Past perfect would contain the word "had" plus another verb.

[nt2011]

The whose in this clause "phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood." is refering to phlogiston rather than many scientists. Hence, whose make sense. Typically, who is only used to refer to person / people.

[thanghnvn]

Thank you ,jnelson0612


Until Antoine Lavoisier proved otherwise in the eighteenth century, many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood.

It was not untill 1900 that I believed in the thing.

both are correct sentense. The second sentence is similar to question 3 og12.(usd pdf verson of og12 to find the question, using a computer)

My question is that why in the second sentence, simple past, not past perfect is used. I think in the second sentence, past perfect is used.

pls explain. Thank you.

[tim]

The whose in this clause "phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood." is refering to phlogiston rather than many scientists. Hence, whose make sense. Typically, who is only used to refer to person / people.

not sure if you have asked a question here, but i'll offer a takeaway anyway: apparently the GMAT is okay with saying "whose X" as a shorthand for the (objectively more correct) "the X of which" when referring to an inanimate object. i can't recall seeing them be as loose with "who", however..

[tim]

Thank you ,jnelson0612


Until Antoine Lavoisier proved otherwise in the eighteenth century, many scientists had believed that combustion released phlogiston, an imaginary substance whose properties were not fully understood.

It was not untill 1900 that I believed in the thing.

both are correct sentense. The second sentence is similar to question 3 og12.(usd pdf verson of og12 to find the question, using a computer)

My question is that why in the second sentence, simple past, not past perfect is used. I think in the second sentence, past perfect is used.

pls explain. Thank you.

you're asking the wrong question. you should NEVER ask why you are using past instead of past perfect. instead, you should default to past unless you have a reason to go with past perfect. do you have such a reason here?

[ishanbhat455]

Xins, the past perfect "had believed" is ideal because two things happen in the past, but at different times:

(1) Many scientists believed that combustion released phlogiston (prior to #2)
(2) Antoine Lavoisier proved otherwise (in the 18th cent.)

Past perfect is used for the earlier past action, while simple past tense is used for the more recent past action. Choice (B) uses the simple past for both verbs, incorrectly implying that they were simultaneous. I suppose the "until" clarifies the intended timeline, but the verbs should indicate the order correctly, too.

Hi Emily,

As per the page 109 of Manhattan SC guide (5th Ed), if the sequence of two past events is clearly indicated (which is the case here), then the use of past perfect is unnecessary.

Could you please clarify this confusion?

Regards,
Ishan

[RonPurewal]

It's perfectly fine to use the regular past tense for both verbs in this sentence.

This question no longer exists in the CAT software, and hasn't for some time. So there's no need for this thread anymore.

Thanks all.