The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated expert

I got stumped by this Q in a mock test and see that the OA hasn't been posted here. It is C. bsd_lover has it right

here is an explanation from mgmat staff in their website (though I don't think I'll get this kind of SC right if given again )

the 'what' construction is problematic in this sentence, because, in general, 'what' conveys a sense of exclusivity / uniqueness. 'what they had not considered possible' implies that there is only one thing satisfying that description, in contrast to 'something...' which admits the possibility of many other such things.
....AND
the biggest bugbear in choice a is the word 'the', which creates an image of a definite set of other infections.

There is an issue with (A). When I read it, there is a mismatch in my mind. What does the author mean by 'the other infections'. He hasn't talked about any other infections yet.

e.g.
Bring the child here.
refers to a specific child whose identity is known or obvious to the listener;

The use of definite article (the) is not correct here. He has not listed out all the relevant infections. So when he talks about smallpox and 'the other infections', it doesn't make sense.

The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as measles and yaws.
A. what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such aswe dont use 'the other' with such as. This is an improper construction as 'the other' signifies all other diseases whereas such as signifies only measles and yaws. There is a definite mismatch here. Also 'something' is better than 'what' as what is a strong word used only for definite things

B. what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections like - - -unidiomatic

C. something they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of such infections as-----CORRECT

D. something had not considered a previous possibility- better control, and perhaps eradication, of other infections such as--------had not considered is missing pronoun 'they'

E. the possibility of what they had not previously considered - better control and possibly eradication of infections like-------incorrect construction


Made some changes - The reasoning for B was actually meant for A

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that the success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue something they had not previously considered possible, and that thing is better control, if not eradication, of infection such as measles and yaws.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

A: Trap. This answer choice uses the redundant phrase "the other infections such as", rendering it awkward and needlessly wordy; this usage is redundant, as "the other" can be deleted without a loss of clarity.

B: This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "such like" to provide the examples of "measles" and "yaws"; please remember, “like” is used for comparing nouns, “as” is used for comparing actions/clauses, and “such as” is used for giving examples. Further, Option B uses the needlessly wordy phrase "a possibility", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrases "considered possible" and "if not eradication", conveying the intended meaning - that the success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue something they had not considered possible in the past, and that thing is better control of infection such as measles and yaws, if eradication is not possible. Further, Option C correctly uses "such...as" to provide the examples of "measles" and "yaws". Additionally, Option C is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrases "previous possibility" and "and perhaps eradication"; the construction of these phrases illogically and incorrectly implies that the success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue something they do not currently consider an older possibility, and that thing is better control of infections such as measles and yaws, and may also be their eradication; the intended meaning is that the success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue something they had not considered possible in the past, and that thing is better control of infection such as measles and yaws, if eradication is not possible.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and possibly eradication"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the thing experts have been stimulated to pursue is better control of infections such as measles and yaws, and may also be their eradication; the intended meaning is that the thing experts have been stimulated to pursue is better control of infection such as measles and yaws, if eradication is not possible. Further, Option E incorrectly uses "like" to provide the examples of "measles" and "yaws"; please remember, “like” is used for comparing nouns, “as” is used for comparing actions/clauses, and “such as” is used for giving examples. Further, Option E redundantly uses "the possibility" alongside "possible", rendering it awkward and redundant.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

The question stem has no errors. Hence A. The reasons to eliminate the other other options are as under
B. Use of "like" is incorrect.
C. The original sentence construction is preferable to this one starting with "something"
D. Changes the meaning eliminating few words
E. The order of expressions changes the meaning.

OA is C.

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the ... t1161.html - +good explanations here

Problems with A:
1. use of the : 'of the other infectios, such as': the other infections makes it like there is a definite list of infections which are being talked of, and every single one of them will/can be controlled..
also the followed by such as is awckward usage.
2. use of what: very definitive.
I want to eat what I like vs. I want to eat something I like. the first sentence implies I have something particular, or a specific list in my mind. The second sentence is more open.
Here in the conetxt use of what seems to imply that 'the control ...' was the only thing the scientists had not considered possible. which might not be correct. It is something they didnt think was possible, not the only thing.

A demanding question that revolves around subtle comparison. The crux of the problem lies in the use of the phrase ‘other infections; This gives a skewed tangle to the whole theme, that they have found something new, only regarding these two other infections such as measles and yaws. However, the text means to include infections in general, among which happen to be these two infections cited for example.

A. what they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as --- other infections is wrong
B. what they had not previously considered a possibility -- better control, if not
eradication, of such infections like --- such infections like --- like is wrong
C. something they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not
eradication, of such infections as --- good
D. something not considered a previous possibility -- better control and perhaps
eradication, of other infections such as ---- other infections is wrong
E. the possibility of what they had not previously considered possible -- better
control and possibly eradication of infections like --- infections like –like is wrong

Just wanted to add that the word "the" in "the other infections" is what implies specificity.

If you make a general statement like what the author is supposedly trying to do here - you want to get rid of the word "the" to be more general - leading you to (C).

Also, they are testing you on such as VS like question. SUCH AS should be used because you are listing examples of infections. Use LIKE when you make comparisons - but not in this case here where you should be using SUCH AS. This alone would narrow your choices to (A), (C), and (D).

Not discussing B) and E) Options

The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as measles and yaws.

a) what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as

What is a very strong word and it is used to represent a very specific idea.

I will do what I think is right. - > I know what is the right thing to do and nothing else can be right. May be doing an MBA.

Something can be general things or you are not sure of. As per the sentence "it is better control, if not eradication" -> Still the author is not decided. Hence usage of "what" is incorrect.

Usage of "the" is again very specific. I want to write with "The" pen. I am going to write with "the" pen. May be the pen is lucky to me and I am going to write only with the pen and not any other pen.

As per the sentence any other disease is meant by the author and not "The"

Hence incorrect.

c) something they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of such infections as
Something usage is correct here.

d) something they had previously thought impossible-better prevention,if not eradication, of

The usage of both "prevention" and "of" changes the meaning of the original sentence.

of makes it very specific but per the original sentence, of other diseases such as.

Hence incorrect.

The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to
pursue what they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as measles and yaws.

Lets analyze:
The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue - The success is the subject and has stimulated is verb
what they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as measles and yaws. - they is subject and had not verb. - The problem with this sentence is the use of "THE OTHER INFECTIONS SUCH AS" - THE INFECTION can not be used with such as- see detailed explanation here https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forum ... t1161.html

A. what they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as
B. what they had not previously considered a possibility -- better control, if not eradication, of such infections like
C. something they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of such infections as - correct choice
D. something not considered a previous possibility -- better control and perhaps eradication, of other infections such as - shift in meaning
E. the possibility of what they had not previously considered possible - better control and possibly eradication of infections like

Hope it helps

The success of the program to eradicate smallpox has stimulated experts to pursue what they had not previously considered possible - better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as measles and yaws.

A. what they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of the other infections such as
"what" mean "one thing", change the intended meaning of the sentence, there are plenty of things that had not considered possible.
"the other" is too specific, we don't know what others are, so the correct usage must be "others"

B. what they had not previously considered a possibility -- better control, if not eradication, of such infections like

C. something they had not previously considered possible -- better control, if not eradication, of such infections as

D. something not considered a previous possibility -- better control and perhaps eradication, of other infections such as

E. the possibility of what they had not previously considered possible -- better control and possibly eradication of infections like

Limiting to A and C:
A: of the other infections such as -- means there are a lot of other infections and the measles and yaws, the two diseases mentioned therein are just examples of many more such diseases. This is far-fetched and not the intended meaning. The intended idea is to refer to just two diseases that are very similar to smallpox. To refer to a wide gamut of diseases will be too outside the scope of reference as Karishma has pointed out
C: Of such infections as— here, the scope of the diseases mentioned is limited to the two diseases. Hence, this carries the intended meaning.

Usage of "THE" in this construction is wrong. Below is a good explanation from RON.

https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... 61-15.html

Ron's explanation:
There are 2 problems with A.
- Major problem is "THE other infections." THE is too definitive here, carrying the connotation of "every single one of the other infections."
* THE is also incompatible with "such as":
- Correct: I never read this book, but I read the other books on the shelf.
- Correct: I never read this book, but I read other books on the shelf, such as "Right Hand, Left Hand" and "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."
- Incorrect: I never read this book, but I read the other books on the shelf, such as "Right Hand, Left Hand" and "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich."
- Minor problem is "what they had not..." vs. "something they had not..." The "what" construction is awfully strong, suggesting that this was THE ONE THING they hadn't thought possible.
* As an analogy, compare the meanings of "I want to do what I love for a living" and "I want to do something I love for a living." The first suggests that the speaker has one particular field in mind; the second doesn't.

Also one more OG problem where the usage of "THE" in comparison creates a problem.

sc-although-she-was-considered-among-her-contemporaries-to-be-the-be-201838.html

In the above cited example if you notice Option 'A', the comparison states "She is the better Poet than her husband" It means "She is the only better poet than her husband". Usage of "THE" makes thing definite.

If we state as "She is a better poet than her husband" --> It means "She is also one among the better poets when compared with her husband."

Always be careful with usage of "THE" in an comparison or presenting examples.

If anything wrong in my understanding kindly rectify. Thanks.

I agree that C is correct. It is just worth adding that the problem with D is that “something not considered a previous possibility” is not correct. It is not a “previous possibility” that we are considering here. It is “something they had not previously considered possible”, the wording in C. Note the presence of “what” and “something” at the beginning of the options. This is a typical GMAT trick to get you to concentrate on a difference at the start of the options. This difference is often not relevant.

The discussions have run so long that it is not clear whether the difference between 'infections such as' and 'such infections as' has been brought out in the prior postings. However, let me make bold to mention it here.
When we say infections such as x and y, we mean to say that there are several more genre of infections which may vary widely in their genesis, morphology or intervention, and the given examples are just two of such infections, not necessarily excluding others. However, this is not the intended meaning of the text. It implies that the so-called better control if not eradication is applicable to only to those two specified diseases such as measles and yaws. This is more plausible because the two cited infections are of similar nature to smallpox namely viral diseases manifested with rashes or blisters on the external body. If the author were to refer to all infections, why will he even give two examples?

This difference is vital in choosing C over A.

Hiii e-gmat,
I am not able to boil meaning differences between A and C
Please help