<p>It is a myth that mathematicians are (so absorbed with abstractions and thus) have no practical interests.</p>
<p>A. so absorbed with abstractions and thus
B. absorbed by abstractions and therefore
C. so absorbed in abstractions that they
D. absorbed in so much abstraction that they
E. too abstract, and so they</p>
<p>Why is the answer C. Isn't it wrong to say they because it could refer to either mathematicians or abstractions. And I don't see what's wrong with A or B.</p>
<p>I believe the answer is C because “absorbed in” is idiomatic.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, that was my guess. Probably an idiom error with “absorbed with”</p>
<p>Ok maybe absorbed with is wrong but I’ve definitely heard “absorbed by”</p>
<p>“so absorbed in abstractions that…” sets up another clause in which the subject is assumed to be the one in the previous clause (“Mathematicians are so absorbed…they”)</p>
<p>You should be able to see that choice A sounds a little bit awkward with the use of and, and Choice C is much more concise.</p>
<p>A Google search yields ten times as many results for “absorbed in” as “absorbed with,” but I don’t think that’s important. It’s the “so _____ that _____” construction that is correct. Choice A should be either “so absorbed with abstractions THAT THEY” or just “absorbed with abstractions and thus.” I wish I could remember the actual grammar terms, but I just know that the “so” means that a dependent-type clause is following, like crazybandit said.</p>
<p>I actually don’t think B is incorrect, but it’s wordier and “absorbed by” isn’t idiomatic. As far as I can tell both B and D are fine, they’re just less clear and concise [sort of like this post!] than C.</p>