Despite its attractiveness, investing abroad can still pose big risks, ranging from the potential for political instability in some countries
to the shortage of regulations to protect investors and a serious lack of information about investments in others.Meaning: Investing abroad is a rewarding form of investing BUT it comes at its own risks. These risks include 1) political instability 2) lack of regulations to protect investors 3) lack of information about investing abroad
Despite its attractiveness,
(Prepositional phrase modifying the noun "investing abroad")investing abroad
(Subject)can still pose big risks
(Verb - pose), ranging
(This indicates the beginning of a present participle phrase modifying the "risk" from the potential for political instability
(From X... to Y is the idiom used) ("the potential..." element 1 of parallel list) in some countries
(prepositional phrase modifying "political instability")to the shortage of regulations to protect investors
("the shortage..." element 2.a of parallel list)("to protect..." is an infinitive modifying "regulations")and a serious lack of information about investments.
("a serious lack..." element 2.b of parallel list)("and" is a conjunction/connector joining 2.a with 2.b)in others
(prepositional phrase modifying "shortage of regulation" and "investments")Quote:
(A) to the shortage of regulations to protect investors and a serious lack of information about investments in others
"from the potential... in some countries to the shortage... and a serious lack of information about investments in others." So we have the construction
From X to Y : X - The shortage of regulation ; Y - the shortage... and a serious lack... We see that Y has two element Y1 (the shortage...) and Y2 (a serious lack) So we can elaborate and say that we have
From X to [Y1 and Y2] This is absolutely correct.
Notice, "to protect" is not a part of the from X to Y construct. This infinitive phrase is just used to modify "regulations" How can we conclude this? Well the way the sentence is written, it dictates a meaning that there is a shortage of regulations. What regulations? the ones used to protect investors.
Also, its worth noting the modifier (in some countries) for X and (in others) for [Y1 and Y2]. Yes, we generally do not look at the modifiers and tenses used while deciding parallelism, but in this case it helps to notice that (in some countries) and (in others) are essentially the same modifier that is used for the two parallel elements.
Quote:
(B) to the shortage of regulations to protect investors and in others a serious lack of information about investments
In (A) we just discussed the modifiers used for the two elements of From X to Y. In this sentence we have "in others" placed after "and" thus this modifier ONLY modifies "a serious lack of information". Keeping this in mind we now have From X (in some countries) To Y and Z (in others). But we wish to say that "the shortage.. and a serious lack" BOTH are an issue on other countries. So we need the modifier to modify "the shortage" as well.
Also, for parallelism It is much better to have
from X (in some..) to Y (in others..) than to have
from X (in some..) to (in others) YQuote:
(C) and the shortage of regulations to protect investors and a serious lack of information about investments in others
This one should be easy to eliminate. At a first glance, we can notice that the construct "From X to Y" is missing a "to". Instead, we have "and". From X and Y is a deterministic error.
It's interesting to see how a single tweak of one word "
to; --> and" the entire option is incorrect. Apart from this small tweak, there is noting that's different from option (A)
Quote:
(D) and the shortage of regulations to protect investors to a serious lack of information about investments in others
"from the potential... in some countries and the shortage of regulations... to a serious lack... about investments in others" So we have From [X1 and X2] to Y: X1 - The potential... X2 - the shortage ; Y - a serious lack. This is acceptable BUT again, notice that X2 does not have the modifier "in other countries" and based on the meaning of the sentence we need to show that this problem i.e. "shortage of regulations" exists in countries. The fact that "and" is placed before it does not allow the modifier of X1 (the potential) to modify X2 (the shortage). Moreover, since X2 is not a part of Y (a serious lack), the modifier of Y cannot modify X2.
Clearly, we see how modifier can help us determine certain constructs in a sentence. Had it been "From the potential and the shortage in some countries to a serious lack of information... in others" This choice, in my opinion, would have been correct.
Quote:
(E) to the shortage of regulations to protect investors in others and a serious lack of information about investments
We again see the modifier error like the one used in (B). In this case, we do not have the modifier for Y2 (a serious lack...) since "in others" is placed before "and"
It's worth noting that in (A) we have "in others" placed at the end of the sentence i.e. Y1 and Y2
in others while here we have Y1 in others and Y2. The latter is clearly incorrect.
Correct choice: (A)GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo could you throw some light on the modifiers used. Generally we don't look at the modifiers while deciding the parallel elements, but in this sentence the modifiers play an important role while deciding the correct sentence structure