Dear Friends,
Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
mymba99 wrote:
There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.
(A) There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.
(B) There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished.
(C) There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.
(D) Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished.
(E) Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished.
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 there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, and the fact that there are no such limits contributes to the overfishing-related depletion of the monkfish.
Concepts tested here: Meaning + Comparison + Grammatical Construction + Awkwardness/Redundancy• A comparison can only be drawn between similar things.
• Information vital to the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
• “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense; the use of passive continuous must be justified in the context.
A: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "depletion through overfishing", conveying the intended meaning - that the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught contributes,
specifically, to the
overfishing-related depletion of the monkfish. Further, Option A correctly compares the clauses "There are no legal limits...on the size of monkfish that can be caught" and "there are for cod and haddock". Additionally, Option A only places extra information - the fact that there
are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught - between two commas. Besides, Option A is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.
B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "depleting them because they are being overfished"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught contributes to the
general depletion of the monkfish
because it is overfished; the intended meaning is that the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught contributes,
specifically, to the
overfishing-related depletion of the monkfish. Further, Option B incorrectly compares "the size of monkfish that can be caught" to "cod or haddock"; please remember, a comparison can only be drawn between similar things. Additionally, Option B uses the needlessly wordy phrase "contributes to depleting them", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.
C: This answer choice incorrectly places information vital to the core meaning of the sentence - the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught - between two commas; please remember, information vital to the core meaning of the sentence must not be placed between two commas.
D: This answer choice incorrectly compares "cod and haddock" to "legal size limits on catching monkfish"; please remember, a comparison can only be drawn between similar things. Further, Option D incorrectly uses the word "being", leading to awkwardness and redundancy; “being” is only to be used when it is part of a noun phrase or represents the passive continuous verb tense; the use of passive continuous must be justified in the context.
E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "depletion because they are overfished"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught contributes to the
general depletion of the monkfish
because it is overfished; the intended meaning is that the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught contributes,
specifically, to the
overfishing-related depletion of the monkfish. Further, Option E incorrectly compares "catching cod and haddock" to "legal size limits on catching monkfish"; please remember, a comparison can only be drawn between similar things.
Hence, A is the best answer choice.To understand the concept of "Extra Information Between Commas" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________