Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
17 Dec 2020, 19:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
66% (01:35) correct
34%
(01:39)
wrong
based on 540
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A handful of companies offer DNA-based tests that supposedly determine how well a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than a standard performance test.
A) well a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than a standard performance test.
B) good a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than standard performance tests do.
C) good a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much beyond a standard performance test.
D) well a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than standard performance tests do.
E) good a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that standard performance tests do not reveal much less than the other tests.
17 Dec 2020, 19:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
THE PROMPT
→ well vs. good
→ comparisons
→ meaning
• quick POE
→ reject A and D because a person's natural athletic abilities are good, not well
→ reject E because do not reveal much less than is needlessly complicated,
→ reject C because that option essentially states that the DNA tests reveal almost nothing; DNA tests reveal not much except standard performance tests.
The best answer is B.
• well should be good
→ The noun abilities is being described and requires the adjective good, not the adverb well.
→ The verb are might have tempted you to choose the adverb well.
Wrong move. We need a subject complement, and subject complements are never adverbs. See Notes, below.
• Is the word "does" missing? Probably not. We are allowed to omit words (ellipsis) as long as the comparison contains no ambiguity.
→ The presence or absence of a verb (does/do) at the end of the sentences is a bit of a red herring.
From context and the words "more than" we understand that we are comparing what DNA tests reveal about natural athletic ability to what standard performance tests reveal about natural athletic ability.
DNA tests do not reveal much more about this ability than standard tests reveal about this ability.
Let's not get too rigid about rules.
Many of you have been taught to pick the shortest answer possible.
→ I understand that rules are important. So is flexibility.
GMAC sets traps, knowing that people are looking for splits.
Not every split is important.
Ellipsis (complete omission of the verb phrase) and substitution (using words such as do to stand in for a verb phrase) are both okay to use in this sentence.
The comparison in option A does not contain ambiguity—just adverb error.
ELIMINATE A
• I do not see any errors
• Option B is not wrong or "wordy" because it adds the lone word "do"!
KEEP
→ not . . . much beyond means not . . . much except
• So, literally, DNA tests do not reveal much except a standard performance test.
→ It gets worse.
Rearrange the analysis. DNA tests DO reveal a standard performance test but not much else.
Compare to option B.
Option B is clearer. The words "do not reveal much beyond" cripple this option.
ELIMINATE C
ELIMINATE D
• compare to option B. Which is clearer? More sensible? No contest. (B) wins.
ELIMINATE E
The best answer is B.
Notes
• Well and good: how to decide which one is correct in this sentence.
Options A, C, and D use well, whereas B and E use good.
Option A: [Some] DNA-based tests that supposedly determine how well a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than a standard performance test.
First, toss the grammar rules for a moment, rely on your common sense, and ask yourself what well or good seems to describe.
If you do not overthink the matter, most of you will decide that the word "abilities" is being described.
→ She possesses well athletic abilities.
→ She possesses good athletic abilities.
The noun abilities requires the adjective good.
Second, haul the grammar rules back in: the construction "abilities are" contains the linking verb are.
So the word well or good must be a subject complement. The subject is abilities. The complement should be good.
→ A subject [ahem!] complement is a noun, pronoun, or adjective.
→ A subject complement is never an adverb
Fun fact: taste, smell, and sound can be linking verbs. Some sentences sound strange even to native ears.
→ Correct but weird: I wonder whether the restaurant changed the recipe for its world-famous lasagna, because it tastes different.
→ Correct, similar, and not weird: This lasagna tastes good.
• Ellipsis and substitution in this comparison
We can use ellipsis (omission of words) in comparisons as long the comparison does not contain any ambiguity.
Correct: I type faster than Natalia. (I type faster than Natalia types. I type faster than Natalia does.)
We should use substitution (insertion of short words such as do or so that summarize whole phrases) in comparisons if ambiguity exists.
→ Definite ambiguity without "does," requires that substitute verb: I like candy more than Natalia does.
(I like candy more than Natalia. Do I like candy more than I like Natalia? Or do I like candy more than Natalia likes candy?)
This sentence cuts closely both ways.
Excluding the verb does or do seems fine because we understand what is being compared.
But including that same verb after standard performance test(s) also seems wise because the sentence is kinda dense.
That is, on one hand, we probably understand that a DNA test does not reveal a standard performance test.
From context clues, we probably understand that a DNA test reveals no more about athletic abilities than standard tests reveal.
On the other hand, the phrasing is dense and the comparison words ("do not reveal much more than") are sophisticated.
Just dealing with the last part of the sentence, the words "much more" already require us to fill in a blank (see bracketed material)
→ These tests do not reveal much more [about how good a person's natural abilities are] than a standard performance test [reveals about how good a person's natural abilities are].
Conclusion: the issue is too close to call. Look elsewhere and find a different issue. Avoid the traps.
• Be careful about reproducing OEs that you find.
A decent number of them are likely to be wrong.
I am likely both to catch the error. And to take advantage of that fact.
If you have no idea what I'm talking about? Good. Let's keep it that way.
COMMENTS
We have a nice mix of newcomers and veterans.
A couple of you need to explain your answers.
Explanations needn't be long.
Many explanations on this thread are both illuminating and brief.
(You can write long explanations if you wish. Four of my best students in this project write or wrote long answers.)
A few of you display a lot of style in your writing. Good.
Wanna know how boring it is to read 10,000 admissions essays?
Writers with style have an edge.
(I understand that I may not be seeing much style in SC posts. Then again, you are writing for an audience.)
As always, I issue my standing invitation to aspirants: you are always welcome to join.
Okay. Jury's in. As is the judge.
If you explained in your post but relied on the "comparison contains ambiguity" line of thinking, as long as your reasoning is sound, you get kudos.
I do not think that approach is the most productive because I think that the issue is too close to call.
If you made a couple of errors in your explanation, you do not get kudos.
If you did not explain enough in your post and you have given more kudos than you have received, you get kudos.
If you did not explain enough in your post and you have received more kudos than you have given, you do not get kudos.
Stay safe, everyone.
Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1)
THE PROMPT
Quote:
• issues?
→ well vs. good
→ comparisons
→ meaning
• quick POE
→ reject A and D because a person's natural athletic abilities are good, not well
→ reject E because do not reveal much less than is needlessly complicated,
→ reject C because that option essentially states that the DNA tests reveal almost nothing; DNA tests reveal not much except standard performance tests.
The best answer is B.
Quote:
• well should be good
→ The noun abilities is being described and requires the adjective good, not the adverb well.
→ The verb are might have tempted you to choose the adverb well.
Wrong move. We need a subject complement, and subject complements are never adverbs. See Notes, below.
• Is the word "does" missing? Probably not. We are allowed to omit words (ellipsis) as long as the comparison contains no ambiguity.
→ The presence or absence of a verb (does/do) at the end of the sentences is a bit of a red herring.
From context and the words "more than" we understand that we are comparing what DNA tests reveal about natural athletic ability to what standard performance tests reveal about natural athletic ability.
DNA tests do not reveal much more about this ability than standard tests reveal about this ability.
Let's not get too rigid about rules.
Many of you have been taught to pick the shortest answer possible.
→ I understand that rules are important. So is flexibility.
GMAC sets traps, knowing that people are looking for splits.
Not every split is important.
Ellipsis (complete omission of the verb phrase) and substitution (using words such as do to stand in for a verb phrase) are both okay to use in this sentence.
The comparison in option A does not contain ambiguity—just adverb error.
ELIMINATE A
Quote:
• I do not see any errors
• Option B is not wrong or "wordy" because it adds the lone word "do"!
KEEP
Quote:
• this option conveys incorrect meaning, although the mistake is subtle
→ not . . . much beyond means not . . . much except
• So, literally, DNA tests do not reveal much except a standard performance test.
→ It gets worse.
Rearrange the analysis. DNA tests DO reveal a standard performance test but not much else.
Compare to option B.
Option B is clearer. The words "do not reveal much beyond" cripple this option.
ELIMINATE C
Quote:
• as is the case in option A, well should be good
ELIMINATE D
Quote:
• do not reveal much less than is almost impenetrable. Needlessly complicated.
• compare to option B. Which is clearer? More sensible? No contest. (B) wins.
ELIMINATE E
The best answer is B.
Notes
• Well and good: how to decide which one is correct in this sentence.
Options A, C, and D use well, whereas B and E use good.
Option A: [Some] DNA-based tests that supposedly determine how well a person’s natural athletic abilities are, but critics insist that these tests do not reveal much more than a standard performance test.
First, toss the grammar rules for a moment, rely on your common sense, and ask yourself what well or good seems to describe.
If you do not overthink the matter, most of you will decide that the word "abilities" is being described.
→ She possesses well athletic abilities.
→ She possesses good athletic abilities.
The noun abilities requires the adjective good.
Second, haul the grammar rules back in: the construction "abilities are" contains the linking verb are.
So the word well or good must be a subject complement. The subject is abilities. The complement should be good.
→ A subject [ahem!] complement is a noun, pronoun, or adjective.
→ A subject complement is never an adverb
Fun fact: taste, smell, and sound can be linking verbs. Some sentences sound strange even to native ears.
→ Correct but weird: I wonder whether the restaurant changed the recipe for its world-famous lasagna, because it tastes different.
→ Correct, similar, and not weird: This lasagna tastes good.
• Ellipsis and substitution in this comparison
We can use ellipsis (omission of words) in comparisons as long the comparison does not contain any ambiguity.
Correct: I type faster than Natalia. (I type faster than Natalia types. I type faster than Natalia does.)
We should use substitution (insertion of short words such as do or so that summarize whole phrases) in comparisons if ambiguity exists.
→ Definite ambiguity without "does," requires that substitute verb: I like candy more than Natalia does.
(I like candy more than Natalia. Do I like candy more than I like Natalia? Or do I like candy more than Natalia likes candy?)
This sentence cuts closely both ways.
Excluding the verb does or do seems fine because we understand what is being compared.
But including that same verb after standard performance test(s) also seems wise because the sentence is kinda dense.
That is, on one hand, we probably understand that a DNA test does not reveal a standard performance test.
From context clues, we probably understand that a DNA test reveals no more about athletic abilities than standard tests reveal.
On the other hand, the phrasing is dense and the comparison words ("do not reveal much more than") are sophisticated.
Just dealing with the last part of the sentence, the words "much more" already require us to fill in a blank (see bracketed material)
→ These tests do not reveal much more [about how good a person's natural abilities are] than a standard performance test [reveals about how good a person's natural abilities are].
Conclusion: the issue is too close to call. Look elsewhere and find a different issue. Avoid the traps.
• Be careful about reproducing OEs that you find.
A decent number of them are likely to be wrong.
I am likely both to catch the error. And to take advantage of that fact.
If you have no idea what I'm talking about? Good. Let's keep it that way.
COMMENTS
We have a nice mix of newcomers and veterans.
A couple of you need to explain your answers.
Explanations needn't be long.
Many explanations on this thread are both illuminating and brief.
(You can write long explanations if you wish. Four of my best students in this project write or wrote long answers.)
A few of you display a lot of style in your writing. Good.
Wanna know how boring it is to read 10,000 admissions essays?
Writers with style have an edge.
(I understand that I may not be seeing much style in SC posts. Then again, you are writing for an audience.)
As always, I issue my standing invitation to aspirants: you are always welcome to join.
Okay. Jury's in. As is the judge.
If you explained in your post but relied on the "comparison contains ambiguity" line of thinking, as long as your reasoning is sound, you get kudos.
I do not think that approach is the most productive because I think that the issue is too close to call.
If you made a couple of errors in your explanation, you do not get kudos.
If you did not explain enough in your post and you have given more kudos than you have received, you get kudos.
If you did not explain enough in your post and you have received more kudos than you have given, you do not get kudos.
Stay safe, everyone.
General Discussion
17 Dec 2020, 19:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
Splits
1) Good VS Well
2) Test VS Tests do
Good is adjective whereas Well is a verb. We surely do not need a verb here.
So we are left with B, C, E
E makes the statement awkward by rearranging it, so we can drop that option.
Between B & C, we need a verb "do" to make the comparison look okay.
The comparison done in C is flawed as we are not comparing the similar things.
Hence, B should be the correct answer.
Posted from my mobile device
1) Good VS Well
2) Test VS Tests do
Good is adjective whereas Well is a verb. We surely do not need a verb here.
So we are left with B, C, E
E makes the statement awkward by rearranging it, so we can drop that option.
Between B & C, we need a verb "do" to make the comparison look okay.
The comparison done in C is flawed as we are not comparing the similar things.
Hence, B should be the correct answer.
Posted from my mobile device
