The category 1 to 5 rating known as the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale

D) to destroy or damage property, and is primarily determined by wind speed; a category 5 storm has wind speeds high enough
E) to destroy or damage property, and is primarily determined by wind speed; a category 5 storm has wind speeds so high as


both (D) and (E) use the same idioms.

b/w "high enough" and "so high as"....i prefer the later.

Going with (E)

it seems like it is D


determined by - correct idiom


the winds speeds were high enough seems to be the correct usage in this case

"so high as to" implies that it does destroy buildings etc however we just need to know that it is capable of destroying buildings etc. the winds are high enough to destroy buildings

not the winds are so high as to destroy buildings

Correct idioms associated with "potential"

potential TO <VERB>
potential FOR <NOUN>

So A,C are out.

Correct idiom associated with "determined"

is "determined by".

So B out.

Remaining D and E

In E ...so high as is not correct..It should be "as...high..as"

D remains....

X enough to Y is used when X is the criteria by which an ability to achieve Y is measured.

..so X as to Y is used when the characteristic X is so extreme in the particular case that Y results.

(MGMAT SC Book)

I'm inclined to go with E.

You probably dont have the 2007 edition.

It's listed under the heading:

'X enough to Y' Vs. 'So X as to Y' (page 110)

There are several things are included in that question.
1) The idiom so X as to (Be ) Y eliminate B and D.
2) The idiom determined by (not determined from) eliminate A
3) X has potential to destroy ( not potential of destroying) eliminate C

....and is primarily and the usage is '';'' is precise .

I choose D as well .
I see nothing wrong with D . Infact i dont agree with the OE. so X as to Y is not a correct idiom , If i remember correctly from OG 11 .

I believe this is a MGMAT CAT question and and they have removed this from their CATs because its ambiguous .

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/post17021.html

mahakmalik

Your observation is correct.

The difference between high enough and so high as to does not seem to be a differentiator between a right answer and a wrong one.

There is one more difference, although may not be strong enough to differentiate right from wrong:

Option B uses the idiom "determined from", whereas option E uses "determined by".There is a subtle difference between the two:

X is determined from Y: Y is the information that is used to deduce X.
X is determined by Y: Y is the reason that X is the way it is.

Here X = rating and Y is the wind speed.

Even by this reasoning, it is probably not possible to eliminate choice B.

This problem is a disputed one; the authors have already considered revising the same.

This seems to be the rarest of the rarest occasions, in which contradiction has been observed between 2 GMAT official questions. Please refer to the following official GMAT-prep question, in which the correct answer consist of "so X as to Y":

often-major-economic-shifts-are-so-gradual-as-to-be-74856.html#p560517

Official Explanation:

When referring to y as the potential outcome of x, the correct idiom is “x’s potential to y.” This sentence incorrectly phrases the idiom as “a hurricane’s potential of destroying or damaging.” When referring to the use of y to determine x, the correct idiom is “x is determined by y.” This sentence incorrectly phrases the idiom as “potential … is determined from wind speeds.” Finally, there is a subtle distinction between the idiom "so x as to y" and “x is enough to y.” The original sentence uses the idiom "so x as to y" to indicate that characteristic x is so extreme in the particular case that y results. In contrast, the idiom "x is enough to y" is used when x is the criteria by which an ability to achieve y is measured. Thus, if a sentence stated that "a category 5 storm has wind speeds high enough to blow away small buildings," this would convey a different meaning: that wind speeds are the criteria by which one measures the ability to blow away small houses.


(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) When referring to the use of y to determine x, the correct idiom is “x is determined by y.” This sentence incorrectly phrases the idiom as “potential … is determined from wind speeds.” The change from the original idiom "wind speeds so high as to..." to the idiom presented in this sentence “high enough to...” changes the original meaning of the sentence; it conveys that wind speeds are the criteria by which one measures the ability to blow away small houses. The idiom "so x as to y" is required instead to match the original meaning: that characteristic x (the wind speed) is so extreme in the particular case (a category 5 storm) that y results (small houses are blown away).

(C) When referring to y as the potential outcome of x, the correct idiom is “x’s potential to y.” This sentence incorrectly phrases the idiom as “a hurricane’s potential of destroying or damaging.”

(D) The idiom “high enough to blow away small buildings” changes the original meaning; it conveys that wind speeds are the criteria by which one measures the ability to blow away small houses. The idiom "so x as to y" is required instead to match the original meaning: that characteristic x (the wind speed) is so extreme in the particular case (a category 5 storm) that y results (small houses are blown away).

(E) CORRECT. All idioms in the sentence are used correctly.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.