Elephants observed in Kenya used different trumpeting noises depending

Not necessarily. Some other sounds expressed emotion or intimidated predators.

katzzz

I do not think one should accept the OA in non-official questions per se. The forum's point is to debate these OAs to establish their veracity. We have seen many wrong OAs in the forum threads from unofficial sources such as the 1000 series. I am more interested in the OE and to know whether the author deems the ellipsis as the part of the structure.

Can you kindly ask the authors to throw some light? You only know the source.

very hard.
using grammar rules, focus on meaning
the meaning of "and " is worse than" or? A and B gone. this focus on meaning is simple but permit us to eliminate two choice. there is no hard grammar rule here. of course, this dose not mean we do not have to learn grammar rules and sentence patterns. we must realize grammarical role before we focus on menaing

in d, were to express is similar to would do. this meaning is not suitable. D gone
in E, if "intended" mean " other intend the expressing" . this is not logic because sound can not intend. typical game gmat play on us
if "Intended" means "other is intended the expressing" . this is also wrong because something is intended to do: is pattern

C is corrent.

this question is about verb form. hard one

Hi chetan2u / egmat,

Can you please have a look on this question. IMO-D.
I can't understand how could C be OA. The sentence explicitly mentions that elephents trumpt noise depending on the PURPOSE. So, here is the intention and hence we need To+Verb. (to express emotion, to intimidate).
We need to use base form of verb with "To".

On this basis A and D left.
Option A uses AND so I eliminated it

Can you please assist.
Are you convinced with OA..??

Hi Experts / chetan2u,

Can you please have a look on this question.
Waiting for your reply..

Thanks

Elephants observed in Kenya used different trumpeting noises depending on the purpose of their call: some sounds were intended as a warning call, while others to express emotion and to intimidate predators.

A. to express emotion and to intimidate
B. intended to express emotion and intimidating
C. expressed emotion or intimidated
D. were to express emotion or intimidate
E. intended the expressing of emotion or intimidating
.
Intended is in past tense hence "to express emotion and intimidate" too must be in the same tense. Which of the answer choices has the same tense? Only C. Hope this is a very simple and easy explanation. This is what parallelism is all about - compare apples to apples in the same form not apples to apple juices or apple pies. Hope that is simple enough

Hi can you please throw some light on this question. Am unable to justify how C is right.

Chose A but realized later how C is the correct answer here.
The play here is "logic" and not parallelism.
We cannot have "and" here.
some ...indented...to A...while others B (or C)
We can't say:
some ...indented...to A...while others B and C.
if "and" needed, this would have to be:
some ...indented...to A, some B...while others C.

First, my usual disclaimer: the GMAT spends between $1500 and $3000 developing every GMAT question, and even the best test-prep companies can't compete with that. Like many non-official questions, this one doesn't quite seem like the real thing to me.

That said... well, the OA isn't too bad in this case.

As others have pointed out, this question is mostly about parallelism. "Some sounds were intended as a warning call, while others ______ or _______." Logically, whatever is in those two blanks needs to be parallel to "were intended." So we need a pair of verbs, and unless those verbs are in past tense, the sentence won't make any sense.

So (A) is gone, since the verbs are infinitives. (B) is gone, because "intimidating" clearly isn't parallel with "intended." (E) is just a mess: "others intended the... intimidating predators." So we're left with (C) and (D).

(C) is fine: "were intended" is just a verb, and so are "expressed" and "intimidated." That makes perfect sense: some sounds were intended as a warning call, some sounds expressed emotion, and some sounds intimidated predators. No problem here.

(D) is a little bit more subtle, but it's basically saying "some sounds were to express emotion" and "some sounds were to intimidate predators." I don't think that makes any sense unless we make it clear that the sounds were intended to express emotion and intimidate predators.

But again: this probably isn't the most realistic question ever written.

Expert,
Please help me in understanding one thing,
Here we need to fill the blank with such a phrase that it should be parallel to 'some sounds were intended'.Now 'some sounds were intended' is passive voice and 'others expressed emotion' (as per option c) is active voice.
Is it correct to include active voice in one phrase and passive voice in another while maintaining parallelism.

GMATNinja, is it that bad to say "some sounds were to do X,Y and Z"? I hate to say it but it doesn't "sound" bad at all (I am not at the stage where I can completely avoid my ear, so please forgive me if I am falling for the same thing)

Hi, can the person who has posted this question remove the spoiler present below the options?