abhishekmayank wrote:
Hi
AjiteshArun,
daagh,
Your help is solicited
Not much has been explained as to why the option A is incorrect :
Researchers at U.C.L.A medical school say the findings support the idea
that some patients who appear completely unresponsive
have some level of consciousness that they cannot show — perhaps low, but real —
and also that they might have the potential to recover.
Whether highlighted parts are not parallel ?
Hi
abhishekmayank,
There are two ways to take A out quickly:
1. Focus on the little things: (a)
also is redundant with
and, (b) using
might and
have the potential also introduces redundancy, (c) adding a pronoun (
they) creates (some) ambiguity, (d) the
that is ambiguous (as
EducationAisle mentioned, does it refer to
idea or
some level of consciousness?), and (e) option A is too wordy.
2. Focus on the intended meaning: The sentence seems to be introducing one idea (
the idea). Do we want to go with a
the idea (i) that... and (ii) that... structure, where (ii) does not seem to be directly related to what is in (i)?
Option A: ... the idea (a)
that some patients who appear completely unresponsive have some level of consciousness... and also (b)
that they might have the potential to recoverOption B: ... the idea that some patients who appear completely unresponsive have (a)
some level of consciousness... and (b)
the potential to recoverAlong with all the other issues we identified in (1), option B is just so much simpler and cleaner than A.
For what it's worth, I think the people who made this question made sure that option A included an almost absurd number of small issues because they wanted there to be no doubt that A is incorrect.