Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so

First, check out the parallelism: "Neanderthals (1) had a vocal tract {...} and (so) (2) were probably without language..." - we have a parallel list of verbs, and both verbs make sense with the subject "Neanderthals". No issue there.

But notice that the comparison is between ONE vocal tract (“a vocal tract”) and MULTIPLE ape vocal tracts (“those of the apes”). Comparing a singular vocal tract to plural vocal tracts isn't ideal here.

In addition, the use of “the” in front of "apes" makes it seem like the vocal tracts of the Neanderthals are like those of SPECIFIC apes, not apes in general. Is that grammatically wrong? Probably not... but it doesn't fit with the context, which suggests that the author wants to compare the vocal tracts of Neanderthals to those of apes in general. The use of "the" leaves the reader wondering, "WHICH specific apes are we talking about?".

Admittedly, these aren't particularly solid reasons to eliminate (A), so let's hang on to it for now and check out the other options.


Again, the parallelism checks out: "Neanderthals (1) had a vocal tract {...} and (so) (2) were probably without language..." - We have two parallel verbs, and both work with the subject "Neanderthals".

In (B), we are comparing a SINGULAR body part (the vocal tract of Neanderthals) to another SINGULAR body part (the vocal tract of an ape), so the comparison works a little better than the one in (A).

Also, (B) compares the vocal tract of a general ape (AN ape) to the Neanderthals’ tract. If that's not clear, consider of these two examples:

1) "The ape has five fingers on each hand." - The article "the" suggests that we are talking about ONE specific ape.
2) "An ape has five fingers on each hand." - The article "an" suggests that we are talking about a non-specific ape--pick an ape, any ape, and that ape ought to have five fingers.

That's probably enough to go with (B) over (A), so let's keep this one.


There are two main problems here.

First, the comparison isn’t great... the issue is similar to what we saw in (A), only now we have MANY Neanderthal vocal tracts compared to only ONE ape vocal tract.

More importantly, there's a meaning issue with the parallelism: “The vocal tracts of Neanderthals (1) resembled an ape’s and (so) (2) were probably without language...”.

• We have a parallel list of verbs, but notice that both verbs can be tied back to the subject "vocal tracts"--that gives us, "The vocal tracts … were probably without language.”
• That doesn't make much sense. As explained in this post, "vocal tracts" can produce sound, but they can't have a language of their own--parts of the body usually can’t speak on their own (unless we're talking about Osmosis Jones--then maybe!).

We can get rid of (C).


Here the sentence is comparing ONE Neanderthal’s vocal tracts to MULTIPLE apes’ vocal tracts. My knowledge of biology isn’t great, but I’m pretty sure Neanderthals (and humans) only have ONE vocal tract, so this doesn’t make much sense.

Also, as we saw above, it’s a bit weird to compare the tract(s) of SPECIFIC (“the”) Neanderthal’s to the tract(s) of SPECIFIC ("the") apes.

More importantly, we have the same meaning issue that we saw in (C): “the Neanderthal’s vocal tracts … were probably without language.” It’s the Neanderthals who were probably without language, not their vocal tracts.

We can say goodbye to (D).


The comparison is okay here, but, again, the articles aren't ideal: we have "the" (specific) Neanderthals and "the" (specific) apes.

But we have the same glaring meaning issue that we saw in (C) and (D), so (E) is out.

(B) is the best one!

Disclaimer: If you aren't convinced that (B) is better than (A), don't stress over it too much. Most of these are pretty subtle arguments, and that might be why this question was retired from the official guides before 2009.

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning of this sentence is that Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled an ape’s, so Neanderthals were probably without language.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Comparison

• Comparison can only be made between similar things.

A: This answer choice incorrectly compares the singular "a vocal tract" to the plural "those of the apes"; please remember, a comparison can only be made between similar things. Further, Option A alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "those of the apes"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the Neanderthals' vocal tract resembled the vocal tracts of certain, specific apes; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals' vocal tract resembled the vocal tract of apes in general.

B: Correct. This answer choice correctly compares the singular "a vocal tract" with the singular "an ape's (vocal tract)". Further, Option B uses the phrases "a vocal tract" and "an ape's (vocal tract)", conveying the intended meaning - that the Neanderthals had a singular vocal tract that resembled the vocal tract of apes in general. Moreover, Option B uses the clause "Neanderthals...were probably without language", conveying the intended meaning - that the Neanderthals themselves probably had no language.

C: This answer choice incorrectly compares the plural "vocal tracts of Neanderthals" to the singular "an ape's (vocal tract)"; please remember, a comparison can only be made between similar things. Further, Option C alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "The vocal tracts of Neanderthals...were without language"; the construction of this clause illogically implies that the vocal tracts of Neanderthals probably had no language; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals themselves probably had no language.

D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrases "The Neanderthal’s vocal tracts" and "the apes' (vocal tracts)"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the Neanderthals had multiple vocal tracts that resembled the vocal tracts of certain, specific apes; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals had a singular vocal tract that resembled the vocal tract of apes in general. Moreover, Option D further alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "The Neanderthal’s vocal tracts...were without language"; the construction of this clause illogically implies that the vocal tracts of Neanderthals probably had no language; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals themselves probably had no language.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "those of the apes"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the Neanderthals' vocal tracts resembled the vocal tracts of certain, specific apes; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals' vocal tracts resembled the vocal tract of apes in general. Moreover, Option E further alters the meaning of the sentence through the clause "The vocal tracts...were without language"; the construction of this clause illogically implies that the vocal tracts of Neanderthals probably had no language; the intended meaning is that the Neanderthals themselves probably had no language.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Should it not be Neanderthals had vocal tracts (plural)?

by having plural 'vocal tracts', we are decribing the inherent nature of the vocal tracts (of the Neanderthals) in general, which I think what the sentence is all about.

From the OA, Neanderthals had a vocal tract... seems to refer to a single vocal tract 'shared' by all Neanderthals which I find illogical.

Correct me if I am wrong, but my thinking is that the vocal tracts(plural) of Neanderthals should be compared to the apes' vocal tracts (plural).

-BM-

Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so were probably without language, a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species.
IN THIS QUESTION,WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE CLUES PROVIDED BY THE LATER PART OF THE SENTENCE.CONCENTARTE ON THE PARTS "AND SO WERE" AND "WHY THEY WERE"..WHAT DO THESE PLURAL FORM SUGGEST;THAT THERE HAS TO BE A VERY CEAR PLURAL SUBJECT PRESENT IN THE EARLIER HALF OF THE SENTENCE..AND ALSO THAT THESE SUBJECTS SHOULD BE CERTAIN LIVING BEINGS WHO POSSESED THESE CHARACTERISTICS.LETS LOOK AT THE OPTIONS
(A) Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes
YES,THIS SENTENCE HAS SUBJECTS BUT 2 OF THEM NEANDERHALS/APES..WHICH ONES
IS THE LATER HALF REFERRING TO? A LITTLE CONFUSION..RIGHT!!! SUSPECT..LETS SEE OTHERS

(B) Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape’s
NEANDERTHALS ARE A CLEAR SUBJECT
APE'S (VOAL TRACTS) CANNOT BE A SUBJECT SINCE WE HAVE DECIDED EALRLIER THAT IT HAS TO BE A LIVING ENTITY ..SO IS BETTER THAN A...ELIMINATE A AND KEEP THIS
(C) The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape’s
VOCAL TRACTS OF NEANDRTHALS IS THE SUBJECT.FIRST THIS IS SINGULAR AND SECOND
THIS IS NOT OUR APPROPRAITE CHOICE OF SUBJECT....THROW THIS OUT
(D) The Neanderthal’s vocal tracts resembled the apes’
BY NOW IM SURE WE CAN MAKE OUT THAT THIS ALSO LACKS A SUITABLE SUBJECT
(E) The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals resembled those of the apes
SAME AS ABOVE

HENCE B IS THE CREDITED OPTION.HOPE THAT HELPED

some possible comparisons:

- Netherlands' vocal tract <==> Apes' vocal tract
- vocal tract of Netherlands <==> vocal tract of Apes
- vocal tract of Netherlands <==> Apes' vocal tract.

Third one is used in case of B.

In cases of comparisons:

Unlike X of A, B's (X) is/are ... (here, X is implicit and is not necessary in the sentence)

HTH.

I'm not sure if I understand your question

In the first one you don´t have comma before and therefore you don't repeat the subject.

Peter ate an apple and drank water
Peter ate an apple, and he drank water

These two sentences are correct. If you put comma you repeat the subject

In the second, you have an enumeration x, y, and z

As the explanation says the comma suggests the coming of the participle because,IMO, if you want to join the clauses using "and" you remove the comma and don't repeat the subject or put the comma and repeat the subject.

Nuclear fusion is the force that powers the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs and ...
Nuclear fusion is the force that powers the Sun, the stars, and hydrogen bombs, and it ....

Let me know if this was what you were asking for.

(B)

(A) Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes
(B) Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape’s
(C) The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape’s
(D) The Neanderthal’s vocal tracts resembled the apes’
(E) The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals resembled those of the apes

that is why i posted this question here. Neanderthals is supposed to be plural but can it be treated as a singular in this context . its like saying ... dogs had a tail which wagged whenever they saw a bone .

You are allowed to talk about a plural group and reference a singular trait of that plural group. "Neanderthals had a vocal tract" is ok. "Dogs have a tail" is ok. "Humans have a heart that pumps blood" is ok.

"Neanderthals had vocal tracts that resembled those of the apes" might be what you're looking for--but it's not one of the answer choices.

Oftentimes, the optimal/most correct answer choice you might have in mind actually does not show up in the answer choices. It doesn't matter--your job is to pick the best of the existing ones--not the best possible answer choice in your mind.

First thing to note is Neandethals is a common subject of compound statement separated by and.

A. those is plural which is referring to singular antecedent vocal tract.
B. Subject Neandethals remains common to both part of compound statement. OA
C, D, and E has vocal tracts as subject of 2nd part of compound statement (i.e and so were probably without language) which is incorrect.
Also, C, D and E uses plural vocal tracts when singular is needed.

Excellent discussion on the post thus far. Pronoun replacement is a nice tool for solving problems like this. You just replace the pronoun - in this case the very commonly tested "they" - with the antecedant to see if the result is logical.

...explain why the vocal tracts were supplanted by our own species - illogical.
...explain why the Neanterthals were supplanted by our own species - logical.

You may want to use pronoun replacement whenever you see shifts in the subject (notice they are both plural so it's not a subject/verb question) with a commonly tested pronoun (it, its, they, them, their).

KW

Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so were probably without language, a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species.
(A) Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes - should be THAT
(B) Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape’s - It means that vocal tract is similar to Ape in appearance
(C) The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape’s - It means that vocal tract is similar to Ape in appearance
(D) The Neanderthal’s vocal tracts resembled the apes’ - It means that vocal tract is similar to Ape in appearance
(E) The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals resembled those of the apes - CORRECT


Thus the answer has to be E

Fame

Interesting.

Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so were probably without language

In the 2nd part of the sentence (so were) .. what does that refer to then. That should refer to Neanderthals so subject should be neanderthals.... Thats what my confusion is...

I still think that the subject is Neanderthals..not the vocal tract.. Correct me please if i am wrong...

Hi Govind, I am assuming you mean to ask what does that refer to in this part:

a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species.

that actually refers to a shortcoming.

The structure a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species is actually called an absolute modifier and is in fact quite frequently tested on GMAT (though it is not explicitly tested in this question, since the entire absolute modifier is in the non-underlined portion).

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses Absolute modifiers, their application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id, I can mail the corresponding section.

Hi KyleWiddison

Multiple doubts

1) As far as I understood, sentence transition over here went in this way: "Neanderthals [past perfect] and [simple past], so were....[simple past]". Is my understanding correct? Can conjunction join two D/Cs in which one is past perfect and other is in simple past.

2) Do these are the two list items that and connects over here
Neanderthals has a vocal tract
a) resembling an ape's
b) so were without language

Isn't "Neanderthals has a vocal tract so were without language" sound awkward

rohitmanglik-

Great questions here - I can see where the confusion comes in. This structure is a bit different than just "and" connecting clauses...you really have to look at the conjunction as "and so".

You are connecting these two clauses:
1)Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape's
and so
2 [Neanderthals] were probably without language...

Using "and so" make a special connection here because the "so" makes the 2nd clause the result of the first. That causal connection is what makes the past perfect legitimate in the first clause (poor vocal tract) because it had to come first and so the simple past is the result (no language).

KW

(notice the not coincidental use of "and so" in my explanation )

Hi KyleWiddison,

Thanks for the reply. A very nice point.

Now that I have studied for the GMAT little more, I am confused whether usage of "had" actually makes this clause past perfect. As I studied in some other forum (though that source might not be that reliable) is "Simple trick I use to differentiate (whether HAD is used as past perfect) is: If HAD is followed by a verb or been, then I conclude that Past Perfect is being used.
If HAD is followed by a noun/pronoun, then I conclude that Simple Past is being used."

Source: https://crackverbal.com/forum/threads/Ad ... hbnk2.dpuf

Can you please throw some thoughts on that.

Thanks