Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Aug 2014, 01:32

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
6 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Appearing for GMAT
Joined: 23 May 2011
Posts: 134
Location: United States (NJ)
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [6] , given: 34

GMAT Tests User
Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2011, 10:42
6
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

37% (02:14) correct 63% (01:25) wrong based on 562 sessions
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
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

"Giving kudos" is a decent way to say "Thanks" and motivate contributors. Please use them, it won't cost you anything.
Thanks Rphardu

Expert Post
5 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1776
Followers: 1231

Kudos [?]: 3372 [5] , given: 181

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 07 Mar 2013, 06:48
5
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Hi all,

This is the sentence with choice C:

Choice 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 of eight war ships as “fireships,” vessels filled with pitch, brimstone, gunpowder, and tar and sent downwind toward the closely-anchored Spanish fleet.

There is no problem with the modification of “which” in this choice. It does not make sense for “which” to modify the immediate preceding noun “the Spanish Armada”. Also notice that this noun cannot be placed anywhere else in the sentence without violating the meaning of the sentence. So “which” can very well jump over “of the Spanish Armada” and can correctly modify “The defeat”.

The link posted in my above post contains a deatil article on the same topic. It deals with when “which” or any other noun modifier can jump over entities to make logical modification and when it cannot. Solve this question from GMAT Prep for the similar use of the logical modification by a noun modifier:

From studies of the bony house of the brain, which is the cranium, located in the back of the skull, come what scientists know about dinosaur brains.

(A) From studies of the bony house of the brain, which is the cranium, located in the back of the skull, come what scientists know about dinosaur brains.
(B) The knowledge that scientists know about dinosaur brains comes from studies of the bony house of the brain, located in the back of the skull, that is, the cranium.
(C) The knowledge of dinosaur brains that scientists have come from studies of the bony house of the brain, which is located in the back of the skull and is called the cranium.
(D) What scientists know about dinosaur brains comes from studies of the cranium, the bony house of the brain located in the back of the skull.
(E) Located in the back of the skull is the cranium, the bony house of the brain, and it is from studies of this that scientists know what they know about dinosaur brains.

Now let’s get back to this question. The issue with Choice C is the use of “sacrificing” is not correct. We need an entity that must be parallel to “gale winds”, a noun entity. Now “sacrificing” is also a nou in that it is a gerund. However, when a sentence requires the usage of the noun form of a word, we must use the main noun form of the word and not the “ing” noun form. Hence, we need to use “the sacrifice” here instead of “the sacrificing”.

Hope this helps. :)
Thnaks.
Shraddha
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Current Student
User avatar
Status: Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 490
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Followers: 249

Kudos [?]: 864 [2] , given: 82

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 04 Mar 2013, 08:47
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
ranjeet75 wrote:
Why C is wrong?


Hi ranjeet75,

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 problem with (C) is the incorrect modification by the relative pronoun "which".

"stymied" means to prevent or hinder the progress. The logical meaning of the sentence should be that "the defeat" hindered the progress of Armada's plans (or as the sentence says "stymied the Armada's plans").

The relative clause starting with "which" is incorrectly modifying "the Spanish Armada", logically it should modify "the defeat". Note that "which" modifies the noun closest to it. Another error is the use of "sacrificing"; the word "sacrifice" can act as a noun here, so, we do not need to change it to the -ing form and make it stand as a noun


If we reword (C) as under then it will be correct:

C'. The Spanish Armada's defeat, 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 sacrifice

In the corrected version above the relative clause starting with "which" is correctly modifying "the defeat". The second correction is in the use of the noun "the sacrifice" in place of gerund "sacrificing"

Hope this helps,

Vercules
_________________

Press Kudos if you want to say thanks

Ultimate Reading Comprehension Encyclopedia | Ultimate Sentence Correction Encyclopedia | GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios -- VERBAL | GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios -- IR

Please Read and Follow the 9 Rules of Posting in Verbal Forum

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 2266
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 260

Kudos [?]: 1525 [1] , given: 248

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 04 Mar 2013, 09:22
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
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
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 2032
Followers: 487

Kudos [?]: 1994 [1] , given: 30

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 11 May 2014, 11:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
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:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-reading-list/

Does this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 244
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 25

Reviews Badge
Re: Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up [#permalink] New post 29 Aug 2011, 03:14
Narrowed down to D and E, however selected D (took 5 min to narrow down)
_________________

-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------

Expert Post
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 2371
Followers: 266

Kudos [?]: 2265 [0], given: 691

Re: Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2011, 13:33
Expert's post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Posts: 191
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: Q V
GPA: 3.7
WE: Account Management (Consumer Products)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 4

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 14 Apr 2012, 15:56
For D and E, you have to look at parrallelisms. from not only to the gerund verb but also to gerund verb.
_________________

DETERMINED TO BREAK 700!!!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Posts: 292
Location: United States
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT Date: 07-25-2013
GPA: 3.83
WE: Architecture (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 70 [0], given: 99

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 06 Mar 2013, 07:56
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
_________________

"Giving kudos" is a decent way to say "Thanks" and motivate contributors. Please use them, it won't cost you anything

Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1776
Followers: 1231

Kudos [?]: 3372 [0], given: 181

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 07 Mar 2013, 06:16
Expert's post
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
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Posts: 21
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 8

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 09 Mar 2013, 03:36
@Vercules .... on your explanation of as to why the option C was wrong.


The which after the comma accorging to another popular post on this forum modifies the noun defeat correctly , since the defeat is of the Spanish Armadas. In other words the mention of Spanish armadas is aswering the question , who got defeated ? and therefore is not independent
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 256
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 22

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 09 Sep 2013, 16:45
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!
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 09 Sep 2013, 18:47
@Vercules: Can you please explain the second statement of the option E. with POE i was between D and E.
i chose D as i was not able to understand the usage of "due to" in the second statement.


"the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1009
Location: United States
Followers: 117

Kudos [?]: 1167 [0], given: 118

Premium Member
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 09 Sep 2013, 22:39
nimisha99 wrote:
@Vercules: Can you please explain the second statement of the option E. with POE i was between D and E.
i chose D as i was not able to understand the usage of "due to" in the second statement.


"the defeat of the Spanish Armada was due not only to gale winds that favored the British but also to the sacrifice


Hi nimisha99

Welcome to Gmatclub!

To pick a correct answer between D and E, you should understand the meaning. The beginning part is:
Stymieing the Armada’s plans to meet up with the Duke of Parma’s army off the coast of Flanders in the Spanish Netherlands,
Stymie means block/prevent

==> Paraphrased version is: Blocking/Prevent X's plan to meet up with Y, ==> is an ACTION, if we put "the reason" after the comma, the sentence is non-sensical. Thus, the noun "the defeat" which refers to action "stymieing" is correct.

In addition, in E, the correct idiom is "due not only TO X, but also TO Y". ==> Parallel structure.

Hope it helps.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 69
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 5

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 09 Sep 2013, 23:10
This one was tough and I got it wrong. I chose C. I thought the "which" was fine, but did not see the "sacrificing" part. Actually I saw the llelism in E of "to gale winds" and "to sacrifice" in E, but thought that C was more concise and clear, than E beginning with the participial phrase. Somehow I was very uncomfortable with the....hmmm...you learn something new everyday....
_________________

Kudos would be appreciated -:) !

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 256
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 22

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 11 Sep 2013, 21:20
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!


Can someone please help me clarify this? Thanks!
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 69
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 5

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 11 Sep 2013, 23:09
russ9 wrote:
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!


Can someone please help me clarify this? Thanks!



Parallelism demands that "due to" be present in phrases after not only and but also. Only then it is parallel. You cannot assume carry overs.

n 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?

This is not perfect parallelism, but ok I guess. But there is an even more serious error involving "which".
_________________

Kudos would be appreciated -:) !

Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1776
Followers: 1231

Kudos [?]: 3372 [0], given: 181

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 12 Sep 2013, 10:25
Expert's post
russ9 wrote:
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!


Can someone please help me clarify this? Thanks!


Image


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:
markers-in-parallelism-139076.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
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 69
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 5

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 14 Sep 2013, 20:27
egmat wrote:
russ9 wrote:
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!


Can someone please help me clarify this? Thanks!


Image


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:
markers-in-parallelism-139076.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



Well described ! And thanks for the link !
_________________

Kudos would be appreciated -:) !

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 46
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 5

Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of [#permalink] New post 17 Sep 2013, 08:35
I have a confusion with option D. Is it wrong because the reason (for defeat) rather than the defeat itself is being modified by stymied which is illogical.. ? Is ther any other difference I have possibly missed..?
Re: Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of   [#permalink] 17 Sep 2013, 08:35
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
What's up with Duke and Calculus? kelloggORduke 8 22 Mar 2012, 08:21
Back Up Plans? RuggedIdealist 1 03 Mar 2011, 10:19
Only after I went home did I remember I had plans to meet up rampuria 5 15 Mar 2009, 09:35
Only after I went home did I remember I had plans to meet up rampuria 2 15 Mar 2009, 09:35
Another back-up plan? bostonsparky 3 02 Dec 2008, 12:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Stymieing the Armadas plans to meet up with the Duke of

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 29 posts ] 



cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.