Sentence Correction

RumpelThickSkin wrote:Took this off another dude's post ( 3 questions from SC sets) - that thread seems to have died out but want your comments on this.

Bronson Alcott believed it immoral to work for wages or to own property, leaving it to his wife and daughters to support the family.

A) it immoral to work for wages or to own property, leaving it to his wife and daughters to support
(B) that working for wages or owning property was immoral and left to his wife and daughters the supporting of
(C) that working for wages or to own property was immoral and left to his wife and daughters the supporting of
(D) it to be immoral to work for wages and owning property, and he left it to his wife and daughters to be the supports of
(E) there was immorality in working for wages or owning property, and he left it to his wife and daughters to support

OA : later. Let's discuss!

Mylogin wrote:Answer should be A

See the below link for the usage of it, I think it is not different here

https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-12-3-t55452.html

Stacey Koprince wrote:Received a PM from ansumania asking me to respond.

I can't discuss this problem in detail because I'm not sure the author has not been cited. I'll discuss general principles. RumpelThickSkin, can you confirm the source? Are you talking about 1000SC? (Note: I don't like that source in general. There are some very good Qs in there, but also some bad ones - and they're all mixed together.)

The pronoun "it" does not always have to have a discrete antecedent. Think about the sentence "It's raining outside." What does "it" mean in that sentence? The sky is raining? The air is raining? Mother Nature is raining? There isn't really a noun you can put there in place of "it." Rather, the "it" is referring to a "state of being" - there is rain falling from the sky.

I believe it foolish to take the GMAT without studying.

The "it" in this case again doesn't represent a discrete noun. Try it this way: It is foolish to take the GMAT without studying. The "it" in this sentence is similar to the "it" in "it is raining." I'm referring to a general state of being, not a thing that I can replace with another noun.

Next, here are two ways to set up a sentence (ways that just might resemble A and B, above ):

Yesterday, I visited the store, browsing for GMAT books.
Yesterday, I visited the store and browsed for GMAT books.

In the first sentence, the stuff after the comma is a consequence of or follow-on from the main clause before the comma.
In the second sentence, I undertook two actions that might be entirely separate: I visited a store (maybe it was a shoe store?) and I also browsed for GMAT books (maybe on Amazon?).

That is, the set-up of the first sentence very clearly ties all of the actions together. The setup of the second sentence ties each action to the subject ("I"), but it doesn't necessarily tell me whether the two actions are tied together.

Stacey Koprince wrote:Received a PM from ansumania asking me to respond.

I can't discuss this problem in detail because I'm not sure the author has not been cited. I'll discuss general principles. RumpelThickSkin, can you confirm the source? Are you talking about 1000SC? (Note: I don't like that source in general. There are some very good Qs in there, but also some bad ones - and they're all mixed together.)

The pronoun "it" does not always have to have a discrete antecedent. Think about the sentence "It's raining outside." What does "it" mean in that sentence? The sky is raining? The air is raining? Mother Nature is raining? There isn't really a noun you can put there in place of "it." Rather, the "it" is referring to a "state of being" - there is rain falling from the sky.

I believe it foolish to take the GMAT without studying.

The "it" in this case again doesn't represent a discrete noun. Try it this way: It is foolish to take the GMAT without studying. The "it" in this sentence is similar to the "it" in "it is raining." I'm referring to a general state of being, not a thing that I can replace with another noun.

Next, here are two ways to set up a sentence (ways that just might resemble A and B, above ):

Yesterday, I visited the store, browsing for GMAT books.
Yesterday, I visited the store and browsed for GMAT books.

In the first sentence, the stuff after the comma is a consequence of or follow-on from the main clause before the comma.
In the second sentence, I undertook two actions that might be entirely separate: I visited a store (maybe it was a shoe store?) and I also browsed for GMAT books (maybe on Amazon?).

That is, the set-up of the first sentence very clearly ties all of the actions together. The setup of the second sentence ties each action to the subject ("I"), but it doesn't necessarily tell me whether the two actions are tied together.