Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 10:37 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 10:37

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 May 2011
Status:Appearing for GMAT
Posts: 70
Own Kudos [?]: 835 [98]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: United States (NJ)
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GPA: 3.5
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4341
Own Kudos [?]: 30775 [24]
Given Kudos: 632
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Status:Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Posts: 442
Own Kudos [?]: 5415 [21]
Given Kudos: 82
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Jan 2010
Posts: 41
Own Kudos [?]: 59 [0]
Given Kudos: 11
Schools:IIM
 Q49  V24
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
_________________________
Why C is wrong?
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42102 [10]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
7
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
A. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing -- not only due to --- but also--- wrong //ism

B. the defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing --- not only due to but also the sacrificing – wrong //ism

C tha defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing ---correlative //ism is ok but, but has relative pronoun touch rule problem

D.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice ---- modification problem ‘ What stymied was not the reason, but the defeat;

E.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice--- speckless
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Posts: 161
Own Kudos [?]: 568 [0]
Given Kudos: 99
Location: United States
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT Date: 07-25-2013
GPA: 3.83
WE:Architecture (Computer Hardware)
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
can someone clarify me the touch rule, i have seen in few OG questions also that if noun+prepostional phrase,which ---if this format is used then i have seen in few sentences that which jumps and modifies the noun instead of the prepostional phrase which is closest to it .can someone explain this rule with some examples
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4341
Own Kudos [?]: 30775 [1]
Given Kudos: 632
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
skamal7 wrote:
can someone clarify me the touch rule, i have seen in few OG questions also that if noun+prepostional phrase,which ---if this format is used then i have seen in few sentences that which jumps and modifies the noun instead of the prepostional phrase which is closest to it .can someone explain this rule with some examples


Hi skamal7,

You can read the following article to understand when a noun modifier can jump over a prepositional phrase to modify the noun before that phrase:
noun-modifiers-can-modify-slightly-far-away-noun-135868.html

This thread also contians a few official sentences and their explanation.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 180
Own Kudos [?]: 330 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
I can't seem to get a certain part of parallelism in my head.

For example, in choice A - " not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing " From what i've been reading - the whole phrase - "not only due to" needs to be in // to sacrificing? Why is that? Why can't it just be "due to gale winds" to "sacrificing" in which case, wouldn't it be parallel? Can't I assume that the "due to" carries over to "sacrificing" and "gale winds"?

In option C - "not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing " = How is this considered //? Due to gale winds(past) vs. due to sacrificing which is an ing -- present?

My issue is always with the "amount of words" I consider to be parallel. If someone could clarify this issue, which is present in a lot of 700 level questions, I will be eternally grateful.

Thanks!
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4341
Own Kudos [?]: 30775 [0]
Given Kudos: 632
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
Expert Reply
russ9 wrote:
I can't seem to get a certain part of parallelism in my head, any advice will be appreciated.

For example, in choice A - " not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing " From what i've been reading - the whole phrase - "not only due to" needs to be in // to "sacrificing"? Why is that? Why can't it just be "due to gale winds" // to "sacrificing" in which case, wouldn't this represent the correct // structure? Can't I assume that the "due to" carries over to "sacrificing" and "gale winds"?

In option C - "not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing " = How is this considered //? Due to gale winds(past) vs. due to sacrificing which is an ing -- present?


My issue is always with the "amount of words" I consider to be parallel. If someone could clarify this issue, which is present in a lot of 700 level questions, I will be eternally grateful.

Thanks!




Hi russ9,

The parallel list always contains a marker. Markers are the words that join the entities in the parallel list. The markers can be divided into two categories: a. Single-word Markers and b. Double-word Markers.

You can read the following article for more detail on this topic:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/markers-in-pa ... 39076.html

This sentence also employs a parallelism marker. That marker is "not only... but also...". It is evident that it is a Double-word Marker. And the rule to apply these markers is that they must be followed by "grammatically as well logically identical entities".

So basically, not only X but also Y where X must be parallel to Y.

Now in Choice A: X = due to gale winds...
Y = the sacrificing...

These entities are not parallel. We must repeat "due to" after :but also" as well to make both the entities "identical". This is the reason why Choice A is incorrect.

Now let's analyze if Choice C is correct on parallelism: X = gale winds...
Y = the sacrificing...

As I have already mentioned in my previous post, these two entities APPEAR to be parallel because both are Noun Entities, but these entities are NOT parallel. The reason is that "gale winds" is a "proper noun entity" but "the sacrificing" is not a "proper noun entity". It is a verb-ing noun ( a gerund) that actually denotes an action. So an action word CANNOT be parallel to a noun word. So Choice C also fails in parallelism.

Now let's analyze the correct answer Choice E for parallelism: X = gale winds...
Y = the sacrifice...
Here both the entities are "identically parallel entities". They both are perfect noun entities.

So, whenever we have a Double-word Marker, we must make sure that they both are followed by he "identical entities".

One more thing I would like to talk about is that "the sacrificing" is a noun. A noun does not have tense. Only verbs have tense. Even if "sacrificing" end with "-ing", it does not show any tense. So there is no question of "sacrificing" being in present tense.

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4448
Own Kudos [?]: 28569 [1]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
rphardu wrote:
Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

A.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

B.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

C.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing

D.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice

E.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice

JusTLucK04 wrote:
Hello Mike,
Here the sacrifice vs Sacrificing: Proper Noun Usage Vs Action noun usage(Gerund) is the reason for later being wrong..I dont get it..Please post your expert comments or kindly share the magoosh link which guides us on such a usage
Thank You

Dear JusTLucK04,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

This is hard, because there isn't any universal "rule" for this. The construction of "the sacrifice of" sounds 100% perfectly natural, and "the sacrificing of" sounds unutterably awkward and incorrect. As a very vague rule, I would say --- if the gerund makes the word longer, then there's less of a reason to use it. With many nouns, say "identification," the noun form is a much longer word than the gerund, "identifying," so the gerund might make the sentence more concise and direct. This is just a vague general guideline. It very much depends on the individual words --- I have never heard "the sacrificing of" used in a correct English sentence.

The deeper answer, though, is you have to read. Read, read, read. That's the only way you will develop this deep sense of what "sounds natural." See:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/

Does this make sense?
Mike :-)
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 180
Own Kudos [?]: 330 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
rphardu wrote:
Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

A.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

B.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

C.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing

D.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice

E.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice

JusTLucK04 wrote:
Hello Mike,
Here the sacrifice vs Sacrificing: Proper Noun Usage Vs Action noun usage(Gerund) is the reason for later being wrong..I dont get it..Please post your expert comments or kindly share the magoosh link which guides us on such a usage
Thank You

Dear JusTLucK04,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

This is hard, because there isn't any universal "rule" for this. The construction of "the sacrifice of" sounds 100% perfectly natural, and "the sacrificing of" sounds unutterably awkward and incorrect. As a very vague rule, I would say --- if the gerund makes the word longer, then there's less of a reason to use it. With many nouns, say "identification," the noun form is a much longer word than the gerund, "identifying," so the gerund might make the sentence more concise and direct. This is just a vague general guideline. It very much depends on the individual words --- I have never heard "the sacrificing of" used in a correct English sentence.

The deeper answer, though, is you have to read. Read, read, read. That's the only way you will develop this deep sense of what "sounds natural." See:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/

Does this make sense?
Mike :-)


Hi Mike,

To add to "C" -- isn't "the sacrificing of" considered a complex gerund? Aren't complex gerunds parallel to action nouns, which in this case, is "gale winds"?

Thanks!
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4448
Own Kudos [?]: 28569 [1]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
russ9 wrote:
Hi Mike,

To add to "C" -- isn't "the sacrificing of" considered a complex gerund? Aren't complex gerunds parallel to action nouns, which in this case, is "gale winds"?

Thanks!

Dear Russ9,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

Remember that GMAT SC is always operating at a few different levels: grammatical, logical, and rhetorical. What works perfectly fine on one level might not work at all at another level.

At the level of grammar, yes, it's 100% true that a complex gerund can be parallel to an action noun. Is "gall winds" an action noun? I would say not. It does not represent an action that anyone performs. It's a thing in the world --- a particularly high-energy thing, but a thing nonetheless. I doubt whether we can call it an action noun.

Nevertheless, suppose we had another action noun, "quick decision" or "careful deliberation" or something of that sort. Then, at the level of grammar, it would be 100% correct to put it in parallel with "the sacrificing of."

That was the level of grammar. At the level of rhetoric, the construction "the sacrificing of" is an complete abomination that should be taken out back and shot. It has absolutely no place at all in a correct sentence for any reason under the sun.

The GMAT loves to trap people who are stuck at the level of grammatical analysis, who fall into the trap of thinking --- well, if something is grammatically correct, then it must be perfectly fine in every way. It's very important to appreciate that the GMAT SC section is full of 100% grammatically correct answer choices that are absolutely wrong, for logical and/or rhetorical reasons.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 180
Own Kudos [?]: 330 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
russ9 wrote:
Hi Mike,

To add to "C" -- isn't "the sacrificing of" considered a complex gerund? Aren't complex gerunds parallel to action nouns, which in this case, is "gale winds"?

Thanks!

Dear Russ9,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

Remember that GMAT SC is always operating at a few different levels: grammatical, logical, and rhetorical. What works perfectly fine on one level might not work at all at another level.

At the level of grammar, yes, it's 100% true that a complex gerund can be parallel to an action noun. Is "gall winds" an action noun? I would say not. It does not represent an action that anyone performs. It's a thing in the world --- a particularly high-energy thing, but a thing nonetheless. I doubt whether we can call it an action noun.

Nevertheless, suppose we had another action noun, "quick decision" or "careful deliberation" or something of that sort. Then, at the level of grammar, it would be 100% correct to put it in parallel with "the sacrificing of."

That was the level of grammar. At the level of rhetoric, the construction "the sacrificing of" is an complete abomination that should be taken out back and shot. It has absolutely no place at all in a correct sentence for any reason under the sun.

The GMAT loves to trap people who are stuck at the level of grammatical analysis, who fall into the trap of thinking --- well, if something is grammatically correct, then it must be perfectly fine in every way. It's very important to appreciate that the GMAT SC section is full of 100% grammatically correct answer choices that are absolutely wrong, for logical and/or rhetorical reasons.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)


Thanks for the clarification.

P.S: SC has taken over -- would it make more sense for me to say "Thanks for clarifying" vs. "thanks for the clarification". I would say that it's clarifying since the latter is a fragment.
P.P.S: I'm going nuts. :)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4448
Own Kudos [?]: 28569 [0]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
Expert Reply
russ9 wrote:
Thanks for the clarification.

P.S: SC has taken over -- would it make more sense for me to say "Thanks for clarifying" vs. "thanks for the clarification". I would say that it's clarifying since the latter is a fragment.
P.P.S: I'm going nuts. :)

Dear russ9,
In this context, either "thanks for clarifying" or "thanks for the clarification" is correct --- both sound perfectly natural. Yes, the first is a little more concise, but that's not really a concern for a short sentence fragment.

My friend, studying GMAT SC in isolation can drive you crazy. You need to READ. Over and above any GMAT preparations, you need to read at least an hour a day. You need to read hard, challenging material in English. If you want to go to business school, you already should be reading the Wall Street Journal every day and the Economist magazine from cover to cover every week. Here are some more recommendations on what to read:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/
None of these rules about grammar & rhetoric really make sense until you are comfortable reading real English about real world events, written by native speakers. That's precisely where you can develop the intuition for what sounds natural. If you try to learn everything about GMAT SC and skip the habit of reading, your understanding will always be more superficial, and to some extent, you will never eliminate the feeling of confusion. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to read.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 31 May 2015
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [1]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

A.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing
---> Reason & due to cant come together in much the same way as Reason and Because cant come together

B.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing
--->Relative Pronoun "Which" incorrectly modifies Spanish armada instead of the defeat.

C.The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing
-----> Same issue as in B, Relative Pronoun "Which" incorrectly modifies Spanish armada instead of the defeat.

D.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice
----> Verb + ing (Stymieing) modifies the 'The reason' instead of "the Defeat"

E.Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice
----> Correctly choice..
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Apr 2015
Posts: 289
Own Kudos [?]: 715 [0]
Given Kudos: 39
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
russ9 wrote:
Thanks for the clarification.

P.S: SC has taken over -- would it make more sense for me to say "Thanks for clarifying" vs. "thanks for the clarification". I would say that it's clarifying since the latter is a fragment.
P.P.S: I'm going nuts. :)

Dear russ9,
In this context, either "thanks for clarifying" or "thanks for the clarification" is correct --- both sound perfectly natural. Yes, the first is a little more concise, but that's not really a concern for a short sentence fragment.

My friend, studying GMAT SC in isolation can drive you crazy. You need to READ. Over and above any GMAT preparations, you need to read at least an hour a day. You need to read hard, challenging material in English. If you want to go to business school, you already should be reading the Wall Street Journal every day and the Economist magazine from cover to cover every week. Here are some more recommendations on what to read:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/
None of these rules about grammar & rhetoric really make sense until you are comfortable reading real English about real world events, written by native speakers. That's precisely where you can develop the intuition for what sounds natural. If you try to learn everything about GMAT SC and skip the habit of reading, your understanding will always be more superficial, and to some extent, you will never eliminate the feeling of confusion. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to read.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)


Hi Mike,

I rejected E just because I saw " the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds".

Can you please guide as to which all phrases can be separated this way though it is uncommon in normal usage.

The other example which I have noticed is " such..XX..as"..

Regards,
Dom.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4448
Own Kudos [?]: 28569 [4]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
2
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
dominicraj wrote:
Hi Mike,

I rejected E just because I saw " the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds".

Can you please guide as to which all phrases can be separated this way though it is uncommon in normal usage.

The other example which I have noticed is " such..XX..as"..

Regards,
Dom.

Dear Dom,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

What you ask is an unusual question. First, I can talk about "due to." The word "due" is an adjective, and it idiomatically takes the preposition "to." When any word idiomatically takes a preposition or even an infinitive or a "that"-clause, there is nothing sacred and inseparable about that relationship. These words certainly could be interrupted by any correlative parallelism markers ("not ... but," "both ... and," "either ... or," "not only ... but also," etc.)
able not to do X but to do Y
prevent the students either from doing X or from doing Y
commanded not only that A be J but also that K be T
The OA in this questions separates the "due" and the "to" in a similar fashion, and this is perfectly fine.

All of the clauses of cause & consequence markers are similar:
so . . . that
such a . . . that
so . . . as to

see:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... nsequence/

My friend, do you know how you build intuition and familiarity with all these structures? Read. It's the very simple advice that no one wants to hear. The very best way to improve one's "ear" for English grammar is to develop a daily habit of reading. See:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2014/how-to-imp ... bal-score/

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
Alum
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4341
Own Kudos [?]: 51445 [10]
Given Kudos: 2326
Location: United States (WA)
Concentration: Leadership, General Management
Schools: Ross '20 (M)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GMAT 2: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
GMAT 3: 760 Q50 V42 (Online)
GPA: 3.8
WE:Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
10
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

A. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

B. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

C. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing

D. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice

E. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42102 [2]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
A. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing --- unparallel correlative

B. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing ---- same as in A.

C. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing --- the sacrificing of is unidiomatic

D. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice --- modification problem. Stymieing the Armada’s plans was not the reason, but was the defeat of the Armada

E. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice ---- correct choice
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1015
Own Kudos [?]: 2754 [1]
Given Kudos: 79
Location: India
Send PM
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
1
Kudos
The defeat of Spanish Armada stymied the plans not its reason.

Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

A. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

B. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrificing

C. The defeat of the Spanish Armada, which stymied the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, was not only due to gale winds that favored the British but also due to the sacrificing

D. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the reason for the defeat of the Spanish Armada was not only gale winds that favored the British but also the sacrifice........modifier error in A repeats here.

E. Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice..............awkward but nevertheless correct.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne