Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

 It is currently 19 Jul 2019, 13:50

### 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

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

# According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect.

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 156
GMAT 1: 700 Q43 V42
According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect.  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2012, 22:55
1
2
According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect. Could someone please explain them to me?

"Following the gold rush, the mining town collapsed." (The correct version is "After the gold rush, the mining town collapsed.")

"We adopted new policies with the aim to reduce theft." (The correct versions are "We adopted new policies aimed at reducing theft" and "We adopted procedures with the aim of reducing theft.")

"When compared to horses, zebras are viscous." (The correct versions are "In comparison with (or to) horses, zebras are viscous", "A zebra can be compared to a horse in many ways", and Compared with a horse, however, a zebra is very hard to tame.")

I am a native English speaker, and these sound correct to me, but I am obviously missing something.
_________________
If my post helped you, please consider giving me kudos.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4487
Re: Why are these idioms incorrect?  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Nov 2012, 18:29
3
1
I'm happy to help with these.

"Following the gold rush, the mining town collapsed." (The correct version is "After the gold rush, the mining town collapsed.")

Technically, the word "following" is a participle, and therefore it should "touch" the noun that is doing the following. Thus,
"Following the dog act, the pony act was a disappointment."
The pony act is the actually think that "followed", that did the "following."
In the sentence above --- yes, that sentence would pass as perfectly correct in colloquial language but technically, the "mining town" did not perform the action of "following" anything.

"We adopted new policies with the aim to reduce theft." (The correct versions are "We adopted new policies aimed at reducing theft" and "We adopted procedures with the aim of reducing theft.")

To "aim at" is correct.
To speak of an "aim of doing X" is correct.

The construction "aim" + "to" is technically not correct. Again, you will hear this in colloquial speech, but that's no guide --- colloquial speech is littered with errors. I don't know that I can "explain" anything besides making the rule clear.

"When compared to horses, zebras are viscous." (The correct versions are "In comparison with (or to) horses, zebras are viscous", "A zebra can be compared to a horse in many ways", and "Compared with a horse, however, a zebra is very hard to tame.")

First of all, I believe the word you want is
vicious -- wild, dangerous, not easily tamed,
and not
viscous --- (of a fluid) thick, syrupy, not easily flowing

The first one makes the famous "missing verb" mistake. The GMAT brutally punishes the following construction
[conjunction][participial phrase]

You see, a conjunction (like "when") must be followed by a full bonafide noun + verb clause, NOT simply a participial phrase. See these blog articles:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/participle ... -the-gmat/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... b-mistake/

Thus, the construction would have to be "When they are compared to horses, etc.", but that's now awkwardly long and indirect.

Does all this make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 156
GMAT 1: 700 Q43 V42
Re: Why are these idioms incorrect?  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2012, 10:12
Thank you for the help. The last one about zebras still does not make sense to me. How is the first missing a verb? I thought "are" is a verb.
_________________
If my post helped you, please consider giving me kudos.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4487
Re: Why are these idioms incorrect?  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2012, 15:40
1
commdiver wrote:
Thank you for the help. The last one about zebras still does not make sense to me. How is the first missing a verb? I thought "are" is a verb.

In the sentence.....

When compared to horses, zebras are vicious.

.... the green part, the independent clause ---- that's fine. It has a bonafide subject ("zebras") and a bonafide verb ("are"). Perfect. The problem is with the red part ----- here the subordinate conjunction "when" is not followed by a bonafide noun + verb clause, but rather by "compared to horses", a participial phrase. That is a construction common in colloquial English and wrong 100% of the time on the GMAT Sentence Correction. Similarly, the construction [subordinate conjunction] + [adjective], by itself, is not complete, and therefore always wrong. Here are further examples of what the GMAT would consistently consider incorrect:
Although sad, I went to the part.
While talking to my friend on my cellphone, I ran a red light.
Because intelligent beyond her years, the student was advanced to the next grade level.
When frightened, my cat hides under the bed.

Those red constructions would be wrong 100% of the time on the GMAT Sentence Correction.

Does all this make sense?

Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 156
GMAT 1: 700 Q43 V42
Re: Why are these idioms incorrect?  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2012, 19:09
So, the red part needs to be a main clause in order for the idiom to be correct?
_________________
If my post helped you, please consider giving me kudos.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4487
Re: Why are these idioms incorrect?  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2012, 11:41
commdiver wrote:
So, the red part needs to be a main clause in order for the idiom to be correct?

This is actually not a point of idiom, but rather of basic grammar. The "red part" (a.k.a the subordinate clause) must be a full clause --- that is to say, must have a full (noun + verb) structure. I would not use the term "main clause", because then it could be confused with the independent clause.

Does all this make sense?

Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Intern
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
Posts: 2
According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect.  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2018, 08:23
mikemcgarry wrote:
commdiver wrote:
Thank you for the help. The last one about zebras still does not make sense to me. How is the first missing a verb? I thought "are" is a verb.

In the sentence.....

When compared to horses, zebras are vicious.

.... the green part, the independent clause ---- that's fine. It has a bonafide subject ("zebras") and a bonafide verb ("are"). Perfect. The problem is with the red part ----- here the subordinate conjunction "when" is not followed by a bonafide noun + verb clause, but rather by "compared to horses", a participial phrase. That is a construction common in colloquial English and wrong 100% of the time on the GMAT Sentence Correction. Similarly, the construction [subordinate conjunction] + [adjective], by itself, is not complete, and therefore always wrong. Here are further examples of what the GMAT would consistently consider incorrect:
Although sad, I went to the part.
While talking to my friend on my cellphone, I ran a red light.
Because intelligent beyond her years, the student was advanced to the next grade level.
When frightened, my cat hides under the bed.

Those red constructions would be wrong 100% of the time on the GMAT Sentence Correction.

Does all this make sense?

Mike

mikemcgarry

Mike. thanks for the explanation above. I have one doubt though, while using the correct form i.e 'in comparison with/to horses, zebras are viscous.' Don't we require a complete subject+verb in the first part of the sentence here as well? Why this sentence can go without a subject+verb in first part of the sentence whereas 'when compared with/to' does? Is there any specific list of such words that require complete clause? If yes, can you please share the ones which we mostly see on GMAT. Thanks.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 231
Re: According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect.  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2018, 14:51
1
SCT wrote:

mikemcgarry

Mike. thanks for the explanation above. I have one doubt though, while using the correct form i.e 'in comparison with/to horses, zebras are viscous.' Don't we require a complete subject+verb in the first part of the sentence here as well? Why this sentence can go without a subject+verb in first part of the sentence whereas 'when compared with/to' does? Is there any specific list of such words that require complete clause? If yes, can you please share the ones which we mostly see on GMAT. Thanks.

Hi SCT!

I can jump in for Mike here

We only need a clause (complete subject+verb) when we are using a subordinate conjunction, like "when". "In comparison with" is not a conjunction, so it does not need to be followed by a complete clause. You can find a list of subordinate conjunctions here

Hope that helps!
-Carolyn
_________________
Re: According to Manhattan GMAT, the following are incorrect.   [#permalink] 09 Mar 2018, 14:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by