A comparative study of early European and Asian cookbooks

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION



THE PROMPT

THE OPTIONS
• When only two items are under consideration, between is strongly preferred to among on the GMAT.

• Ambiguity / lack of parallelism: of cooking or slaughtering and dressing
→ Given the word "or," the preposition OF seems to have two objects:
X = cooking
Y = slaughtering and dressing
→ Prepositions are usually repeated in parallel construction.
Without a repeated preposition, it is very difficult to tell where the Y element begins and especially difficult if the Y element contains two of its own components.
I would be highly suspicious of the failure to repeat "of."

• ambiguous or incorrect antecedent: WHICH
→ to what does which refer?
Knowledge?
The verb assumed, as in "French cookbooks assumed no significant prior knowledge"?
The antecedent of which is unclear at best.
ELIMINATE A

• No errors
→ between correctly modifies a comparison of two kinds of cookbooks (European and Asian).
→ of is written before cooking and repeated before slaughtering, a construction that makes meaning clear and does not compromise parallelism

→ Ellipsis, DID
→ but Asian cookbooks did = [Although European cookbooks assumed no significant prior knowledge], Asian cookbooks DID assume significant prior knowledge.
The upshot is that the European cookbooks described how to cook or to slaughter and dress meat.
The Asian cookbooks did NOT describe how to cook or to slaughter and dress meat.

This is a split between DID NOT and DID, a split that may be difficult to see because of the way that assume prior knowledge is negated.

[European cookbooks] "Assumed no prior knowledge" = did not assume prior knowledge
[Asian cookbooks] "DID" = did assume prior knowledge

The negation is absolutely correct; it just makes things hard for non-native speakers when the word "did" pops up.
Option E gives us a clue about what implicitly follows "did."
Look at what follows "did" in that option: . . .Asian cookbooks did assume such prior knowledge of cooking or [of] slaughtering and dressing meat
We do not need to repeat all of those words.
"Did" stands in for the entire verb phrase.

Perhaps "did so" might have been clearer, but goodness: we are here to learn, not to nitpick sentences to death.
If you want immaculate non-official sentences, take a look at the first page of SC Butler, on which I extend an invitation, here.
KEEP

• "between themselves" is silly and ungrammatical.
We can say that the study found differences between the cookbooks or between them, but not between themselves—are there two studies? Are the cookbooks examining themselves for differences?

• the preposition "of" should be repeated for clarity and parallelism

• that is awkwardly placed and looks as if it might modify "meat."
We must work too hard to discern that the reference is to knowledge.
A contrast word such as "but" in option B is better at conveying the contrast than the word that.
ELIMINATE C

• style note (not enough to eliminate the option, but enough to make you very suspicious)
The phrase "European, particularly French, cookbooks" is not standard usage.
Compare that phrasing to "European cookbooks, particularly French ones." ← That phrasing is standard and sensible.

• did it is ungrammatical
The pronoun it cannot refer to a verb or an action.
Asian cookbooks did what? Asian cookbooks assumed no significant prior knowledge of XYZ.
It incorrectly refers to assumed.

Sidebar, takeaway: pretty much the only time that you can use "did it" rather than "did" or "did so" is when the first verb is do, does, or did (and has an object attached to that "to do" verb.)
Correct: Reva did the hardest page of the homework before all the other students did it.
Did = did and it = hardest page
In this case, the pronoun it is misused.
ELIMINATE D

• the preposition "of" should be repeated for clarity and parallelism

• This sentence says what option B says but uses 11 extra words to do so.
Concision is important.
Option B is better.
If you have a really hard time deciding, let the first bullet point (about "of") tip the balance for you towards option B.
ELIMINATE E

The best answer is B.

COMMENTS

debjit1990 , it is good to "see" you again.

The discussion on this thread is thoughtful and helpful. Well done.

All aspirants have a standing invitation to post on Butler.
Take a risk. You've got nothing to lose and quite a bit to gain—to wit, better command of SC.
If you can explain an SC question, you have mastered the concepts or are very close to doing so.

Almost all of these posts and explanations are excellent.
Very nicely done.

PyjamaScientist , I am bumping you to Best Community Reply.