I’m keeping my fingers crossed for you all. Good luck my friends
1. First split:
strangers /
to strangers When we say
...people are genetically more similar to their friends than strangers... we might mean two things:
a.
...people are genetically more similar to their friends than strangers are genetically more similar to their friends... (Nonsensical)
b.
...people are genetically more similar to their friends than they are genetically more similar to strangers... (Intended meaning)
In order to remove the ambiguity we need
to after
than:
...people are genetically more similar to their friends than (they are genetically more similar) to strangers... the part in brackets is omitted for the sake of concision but meant. Hence, A and C are out.
2. Second split: what is much more interesting to know
are /
is MGMAT says that sometimes the subject of a sentence can be a whole clause. This sort of subject is always singular and requires a singular verb form:
Whatever they want to do is fine with me....what is much more interesting to know is...Hence, A and C are out.
3. Third split: In order to maintain parallelism we need
that after
and:
...what is much more interesting to know is that the genes... and that this difference...Each parallel element should work with the root phrase:
...what is much more interesting to know is that the genes that control immunity to certain diseases are different between friends......what is much more interesting to know is that this difference reduces the spread of disease and provides...Hence, A and E are out.
4. Fourth split: we have B and D as contenders. Let’s juxtapose them:
B.
...this difference reduces the spread of disease and provides them an evolutionary advantage...D.
...this difference reduces the spread of disease, providing them an evolutionary advantage...D has a meaning different from that of B but similar to that of A. Since D conserves the original meaning, we need to adhere to it unless it’s nonsensical or contradictory. Let’s see what B and D mean. First, we need to check D for two things –
causality and
sequence:
a. When we use
comma + ing modifier, the information presented earlier in the sentence leads to or results in the information presented later in the sentence. In other words, check the causality. An example from
MGMAT SC guide:
The engineer fixed the problem, earning himself a promotion.Because the engineer fixed the problem, he earned a promotion. Fixing the problem resulted in earning the promotion. Similarly, when we say
...this difference reduces the spread of disease, providing them an evolutionary advantage... as in D, we mean that because this difference reduces the spread, it provides an advantage. This construction illustrates a causal relationship: why people have an advantage? Because the spread is reduced. This is completely tenable meaning and we need to maintain it.
b. When we use
comma + ing modifier, whichever statement comes first in the sentence, is the instigating action, and whichever comes second, is the effect or result. In other words, check the sequence. An example from
MGMAT SC guide:
She slipped on the ice, breaking her ankle. Breaking her ankle, she slipped on the ice. The first sentence correctly describes what happened: the woman first slipped and then broke her ankle. However, the second sentence is illogical because it implies that she broke her ankle first and then slipped on the ice. Similarly, when we says
...this difference reduces the spread of disease, providing them an evolutionary advantage... as in D, we mean that first the spread was reduced, and then this reduction was considered an advantage. Again, this is completely tenable meaning and we need to maintain it. Option D passes the exam for both casualty and sequence.
5. Let’s see what B means.When we say
...this difference reduces the spread of disease and provides them an evolutionary advantage... as in B, we don’t necessarily mean the causality and the sequence as we do in D.
...difference reduces the spread and provides an advantage... doesn’t necessarily mean that the advantage resulted from the reduction. It can result from whatever. Similarly, using
and instead of
comma + ing doesn’t necessarily mean that the reduction comes first and the advantage next. The reverse may very well be true. Hence, the original meaning of the sentence is lost.
Conclusion: since D maintains the original meaning and this meaning is tenable, I vote for
D.
close
01 Jul 2019, 11:36
