having three-dimensional data to represent on a two-dimensional surface

Oswinw011

Senior Member
Chinese
Voice analysts have often struggled with the problem of having three-dimensional data to represent on a two-dimensional surface.(GMAT)

Hi,
Why is the italic part unclear? According to the answer, "voice analysts" can also be the unwanted subject of "represent on". But it sounds illogical to me.

Can I make the awkward italic phrase to:
having three-dimensional data be represented on a two-dimensional surface?
Thanks.
 
  • dojibear

    Senior Member
    English - Northeast US
    Voice analysts have often struggled with the problem of having three-dimensional data to represent on a two-dimensional surface.
    I don't see "voice analysts" as a possible subject of the verb "represent". And this sentence is correct grammar.

    What is the voice analysts problem? Having data? No. That is not a problem. Representing data? Yes. That is the problem.
    So the "problem" is "representing data". Is that obvious from this wording?

    I would use the phrase "the problem of representing" to make the key idea clear. For example:

    Voice analysts have often struggled with the problem of representing three-dimensional data on a two-dimensional surface.
     

    dojibear

    Senior Member
    English - Northeast US
    Can I make the awkward italic phrase to:
    having three-dimensional data be represented on a two-dimensional surface?
    I don't think "having" works. This is not a causal situation. The analysts are not causing some entity to do something. They are not telling someone else to represent something.
     

    dojibear

    Senior Member
    English - Northeast US
    I agree about your all but whole reply except for this part:
    I am confused. What does "part" mean? Doesn't it mean "part of your reply"?

    According to the answer, "voice analysts" can also be the unwanted subject of "represent on".
    The answer text doesn't say that. It says that "voice analysts" is the subject of the sentence,
    but that Answer A makes "data" possibly the unwanted subject of the sentence.

    But I can't really explain the 5 comments, because you don't show the 6 sentences (the original one, and the 5 suggested changes).
    So your link shows comments about unknown sentences.
     

    Oswinw011

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    I am confused. What does "part" mean? Doesn't it mean "part of your reply"?
    Forgive my broke English. Yes, I mean part of your reply. :D
    The answer text doesn't say that. It says that "voice analysts" is the subject of the sentence,
    but that Answer A makes "data" possibly the unwanted subject of the sentence.

    But I can't really explain the 5 comments, because you don't show the 6 sentences (the original one, and the 5 suggested changes).
    So your link shows comments about unknown sentences.
    Oh, you don't have to explain the 5 comments. Some of them are distracting and making a point of various grammar knowledge.

    I don't see how
    "Answer A makes "data" possibly the unwanted subject of the sentence", considering that there's no such collocation as "have three-dimensional data to represent". Am I right?

    We can "have something done" or "have somebody do/doing", but not that one.
     
    Os: We can "have something done" or "have somebody do/doing", but not that one.

    No.

    The construction is not bad or odd. {A1} I have work to do. {A2} I have a baby to feed.

    Now make {A1} more complicated, there is work, but I have an invitation to go to a party. So, I tell the inviter: {B} "I'm stuck with the problem of having work to do this evening, yet wanting badly to go to your party."

    Later I say to one who attended, and I explain: {C} "Having work to do, I could not go to the party."

    NOTE: I have read your picture of the test item. Yes, the E answer is clearer. But A, the subject of your post, is not inherently a bad contruction
     
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >
    Top