GMATNinja wrote:
Arthurito wrote:
One thing about this question
(A) Because there are provisions of the new maritime code that provide that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas, they have already stimulated
Since THEY is the subject of the second clause, cant we say that it unambiguously refers back to provisions ? so it's not ambiguous ? to me the problem isnt here, but maybe im wrong
what do you think[url=https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja]
...
(A) Because there are provisions of the new maritime code that provide that even tiny islets can be the basis for claims to the fisheries and oil fields of large sea areas, they have already stimulated
Since THEY is the subject of the second clause, cant we say that it unambiguously refers back to provisions ? so it's not ambiguous ? to me the problem isnt here, but maybe im wrong
what do you think[url=https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja]
...
