In the late 1990s, Dr. Sarah Martinez began investigating the neurological impacts of chronic sleep deprivation. After spending nearly a...
GMAT Standard English Conventions : (Grammar) Questions
In the late 1990s, Dr. Sarah Martinez began investigating the neurological impacts of chronic sleep deprivation. After spending nearly a decade collecting data from thousands of participants across multiple continents, _____ challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss.
Which choice completes the text so that it conforms to the conventions of Standard English?
fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss were challenged by the research
Dr. Martinez challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss
the research findings challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience
challenges to fundamental assumptions about brain resilience emerged from the data
Let's begin by understanding the meaning of this sentence. We'll use our understanding of pause points and segment the sentence as shown - understanding and assimilating the meaning of each segment bit by bit!
Sentence Structure
Sentence 1:
- In the late 1990s,
- Dr. Sarah Martinez
- began investigating the neurological impacts
- of chronic sleep deprivation.
Sentence 2:
- After spending nearly a decade collecting data
- from thousands of participants
- across multiple continents,
- _____ [?] challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience
- to sleep loss.
Understanding the Meaning
The first sentence sets the scene:
- In the late 1990s, Dr. Sarah Martinez began investigating
- She started researching the neurological impacts of chronic sleep deprivation
Now the second sentence gives us the result of all that work:
- "After spending nearly a decade collecting data from thousands of participants across multiple continents..."
This is where we have the blank. Let's look at the choices:
- Choice A: fundamental assumptions...were challenged by the research
- Choice B: Dr. Martinez challenged fundamental assumptions
- Choice C: the research findings challenged fundamental assumptions
- Choice D: challenges...emerged from the data
The choices vary in WHO or WHAT is doing the challenging action.
To see what works here, let's think about what we just read. The sentence starts with "After spending nearly a decade collecting data..."
Now here's the key question: WHO spent nearly a decade collecting data?
Dr. Martinez did. She's the one who spent ten years gathering information.
What do we notice about the structure here?
- When a sentence begins with a phrase like "After spending nearly a decade..."
- That opening phrase describes an action
- It needs to connect to the person who actually DID that action
- That person must come immediately after the comma
- In this case:
- The opening phrase tells us about someone spending a decade collecting data
- Dr. Martinez is the one who did that
- So "Dr. Martinez" must be the subject that follows the comma
The correct answer is Choice B: "Dr. Martinez challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss"
This creates a logical flow: Dr. Martinez spent the decade collecting data, and then Dr. Martinez challenged the assumptions based on what she found.
GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED
Connecting Opening Phrases to the Right Subject
When a sentence begins with a descriptive phrase (called a modifying phrase in grammar terms), that phrase must logically connect to the subject that immediately follows it. This is especially important with phrases that describe actions.
The Pattern:
- Opening phrase: After spending nearly a decade collecting data...
- Must connect to: the person who spent that decade → Dr. Martinez
- Correct structure: After spending nearly a decade collecting data, Dr. Martinez challenged...
Another example:
- INCORRECT: "After studying all night, the test was still difficult"
- The test didn't study all night!
- CORRECT: "After studying all night, I still found the test difficult"
- I studied all night, so "I" correctly follows the opening phrase
In this question:
- The opening phrase describes spending a decade collecting data
- Dr. Martinez is the one who did this action
- Therefore, "Dr. Martinez" must be the subject that comes right after the comma
- Any other choice creates a disconnect where the opening phrase seems to describe something that didn't actually do the action
fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss were challenged by the research
✗ Incorrect
- "fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss were challenged by the research"
- This creates what's called a dangling modifier
- The opening phrase "After spending nearly a decade..." describes who did the spending
- "Fundamental assumptions" can't spend a decade collecting data - only Dr. Martinez can
- This makes the sentence illogical because the opening phrase doesn't properly connect to what follows
Dr. Martinez challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience to sleep loss
✓ Correct
- Correct as explained in the solution above.
the research findings challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience
✗ Incorrect
- "the research findings challenged fundamental assumptions about the brain's resilience"
- This also creates a dangling modifier
- "Research findings" didn't spend a decade collecting data - Dr. Martinez did
- The opening phrase incorrectly appears to describe the research findings rather than Dr. Martinez
challenges to fundamental assumptions about brain resilience emerged from the data
✗ Incorrect
- "challenges to fundamental assumptions about brain resilience emerged from the data"
- This too creates a dangling modifier
- "Challenges" didn't spend a decade collecting data - Dr. Martinez did
- The sentence structure doesn't properly connect the opening phrase to its logical subject