Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 20:21 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 20:21
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5   
655-705 Level|   Idioms/Diction/Redundancy|   Meaning/Logical Predication|   Modifiers|   Parallelism|   Verb Tense/Form|                        
User avatar
generis
User avatar
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Last visit: 18 Jun 2022
Posts: 5,273
Own Kudos:
37,384
 [1]
Given Kudos: 9,464
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,273
Kudos: 37,384
 [1]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 21 Jul 2019, 22:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
(A) As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.
Show more
akash7gupta11
Hello , generis

In option A , I am concerned about the connector and.

if you connect 2 sentences/ clauses with "and" you are implying that the two sentences are independent of each other.
But I think they pilfer to sell. These are not independent.
Show more
akash7gupta11 , I am not exactly sure what you are asking.
Is the official question correct? Yes.
As far as the highlighted sentence: I think that the idea is slightly overstated.

She went to an Ivy League school and [thereby] bought herself options.
She went to an Ivy League school in order to buy herself options.

See my citation in the footnote. Both sentences are acceptable. AND can be used for sentences that are not logically independent of each other.

This is a correct answer to an official question.
We need to figure out how to tweak your theory about "and." The theory is not quite correct. Answer A is correct.

We are allowed to use "and" in order to separate the second part of a compound subject from a list in the first part of the compound subject.

Essentially, we have two lists. After not only are the thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, we find out that the thieves can also engage in two other broad kinds of activity.
THEY can
--- pilfer data X, data Y, and data Z
AND
-- sell the data

This setup is called a compound predicate (one subject followed by two verbs).

The first verb phrase that begins with pilfer lists three examples.
They can
------pilfer valuable information SUCH AS
--------------business development strategies
--------------new product specifications, AND
--------------contract bidding plans,
AND
------sell the data to competitors.

We have two lists. We need an AND for the last item of the first list as well as an AND to precede the second part of the two-part verb.

I can't figure out why you object to the and.
You seem to be bothered by the meaning.

If you believe that intent should be reflected by replacing the second AND with in order to, in this question
and according to these options, that preference is not a necessity.
The one answer option that satisfies your theory is fatally flawed.

AND can join two clauses in which one makes the other possible.*

The sentence says, "Thieves can get money THIS way [bank accounts]; they can also steal X, Y, and Z, and sell the stolen goods to competitors [and get money THAT way].
Thieves pilfer things and sell them. Thieves pilfer things in order to sell them.
You might like the second sentence better, but it's not a reason to reject an answer unless the answer choices are clearly testing whether AND is out of place.

That option is not among these choices.

You might be bothered by the successive use of comma + and.
As I mentioned, such successive use is fine when required.
We need another AND to set the second part of the predicate off from the last item in the list.

I agree with you. The thieves do pilfer those things in order to sell them. But intent does not automatically lead to result.
This sentence discusses types of sophisticated criminal activity, not the mindset of thieves.
In other words, the thieves can steal the data and can sell what they stole, and these activities, above and beyond "merely" hacking a bank account, demonstrate the increasing sophistication of criminal activity on the internet.

This sentence describes those facts. The situation might be otherwise—no market is guaranteed.

It's okay that the sentence uses a conjunction to state that the thieves steal data and sell data.

Hope that helps.

**The uses of AND
13.23 (a) The second clause is a CONSEQUENCE or RESULT of the first; i.e., the first conjoin presents the circumstances (frequently the circumstantial background) enabling the event described in the second conjoin to take place. This [kind of AND conjunction] entails that the order of the clauses also reflects chronological sequence:

He heard an explosion and he (therefore) phoned the police.
Quirk et al. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. §§13.22-23
avatar
prakhar992
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 05 May 2019
Last visit: 26 Dec 2022
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
12
Given Kudos: 133
Location: India
Schools: INSEAD Jan 22 intake HEC'22 (J) Rotman '23 IIMA PGPX'23 (A) ISB '23 BU (A)
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 2.8
Schools: INSEAD Jan 22 intake HEC'22 (J) Rotman '23 IIMA PGPX'23 (A) ISB '23 BU (A)
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35
Posts: 81
Kudos: 12
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 31 Jul 2019, 10:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
NOT ONLY..... BUT ALSO IS USED FOR ONLY TWO THINGS. FOR MORE THAN TWO ELEMENTS WE HAVE TO USE A PARALLEL LIST, RIGHT? CAN
GMATNinja PLEASE HELP.
avatar
Snigdha241
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2018
Last visit: 16 May 2020
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 14 Sep 2019, 00:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

I have a doubt regarding this question.

they can also pilfer info such as----, and sell data...
",and" construction is used for to connect 2 ICs. But in this case, "'and sell data.." does not have a subject.

How is this construction OK?

please help.

Thanks in advance.

Snigdha
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,779
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,779
 [1]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 30 Nov 2019, 16:10
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Snigdha241
Hi,

I have a doubt regarding this question.

they can also pilfer info such as----, and sell data...
",and" construction is used for to connect 2 ICs. But in this case, "'and sell data.." does not have a subject.

How is this construction OK?

please help.

Thanks in advance.

Snigdha
Show more
Quote:
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.
Show more

I think some of the confusion here stems from the fact that there's one parallel list nested within another parallel list.

    parallel list #1: "...they can also pilfer valuable information... and sell the data..."
    parallel list #2 (nested inside list #1): "... valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans..."

The comma between "plans" and the "and" (highlighted above) is NOT there to connect two independent clauses. Instead, it just helps separate list #2 ("such as... strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans") from list #1 ("pilfer... and sell"). This comma is simply used for clarity, and the GMAT is pretty flexible with that sort of comma usage. So there's no problem there at all.

prakhar992
NOT ONLY..... BUT ALSO IS USED FOR ONLY TWO THINGS. FOR MORE THAN TWO ELEMENTS WE HAVE TO USE A PARALLEL LIST, RIGHT? CAN
GMATNinja PLEASE HELP.
Show more
Yes! The construction is, "... not only X but also Y," so it is generally used for two "things".

However, those "things" could certainly be comprised of multiple items, i.e.:

    "Coconut oil is great not only 1) for culinary uses such as frying, sautéing, and baking but also 2) for health and beauty applications such as relieving skin irritation and protecting hair from UV damage."

I hope that helps!
User avatar
Pritishd
User avatar
UNC Kenan Flagler Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Last visit: 05 Jul 2025
Posts: 233
Own Kudos:
304
Given Kudos: 120
GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20
WE:Analyst (Consumer Packaged Goods)
GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20
Posts: 233
Kudos: 304
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 29 Dec 2019, 07:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
So I've seen a lot of test-takers make mistakes on this question, usually because of overreliance on an idiom “rule” that doesn’t really exist. If you see the phrase “not only”, that does NOT automatically mean that you need to have a “but also” somewhere else in the sentence! There’s no reason why you couldn’t use the phrase “not only” by itself, as long as it makes logical sense with the context of the sentence.

Don’t get me wrong: “not… but” phrases are pretty important on the GMAT, but only because they require parallelism. Basically, whatever follows the word “not” (or “not only”) must be structurally parallel to whatever follows the word “but” (or “but also”). (Similar parallelism rules apply to both/and and either/or constructions – more on these in an upcoming Topic of the Week.)

But again, there’s nothing wrong with having “not only” without the “but also.”

Quote:
A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
“They” jumps out at me right away, but I think it’s fine, since it refers to “thieves.” I suppose “they” could also refer to “bank accounts,” but I don’t think the pronoun is automatically wrong. Ambiguity isn’t an absolute rule (see our YouTube webinar on this pronouns for more), and “they” isn’t particularly confusing here.

The parallelism also seems OK, even if it doesn’t sound great. We have two different lists going on in (A). First, we have a pair of parallel verbs: “…they can also pilfer information… and sell data…” That seems fine. We also have a list of the types of information that thieves pilfer: “…such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans…” That’s just three parallel nouns – no problem. Keep (A).

Quote:
B. they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling
(B) is very similar to (A), except that the final “and” is followed by “selling.” And that’s a problem, because I don’t know what “selling” is parallel to: nothing in the sentence is in the same format. Logically, “selling” should be parallel to “pilfer”, but in that case, it should be “…they pilfer… and sell…”, as in answer choice (A). (B) can be eliminated.

Quote:
C. also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling
The big change here is that “pilfering” and “selling” are now “-ing” words – modifiers, in this case. (Feel free to check out our guide to “-ing” words for more on this topic.)

But that doesn’t really make any sense. “As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, pilfering valuable information…” For this to be correct, “pilfering valuable information” would have to modify “not only are thieves able to divert cash…” – and it simply doesn’t. These are completely different types of criminal activity, and the “pilfering valuable information” does not modify “diverting cash.”

Similarly, “selling” is basically hanging out on its own. I guess it’s trying to modify the previous phrase beginning with “pilfering”, but I can’t make much sense of that, either. (C) is out.

Quote:
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
OK, now we really do have a “not only… but also” structure, which means that we need to think about parallelism again. There’s not much wiggle-room here: whatever follows “not only” needs to be parallel to whatever follows “but also.”

So we have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfer valuable information…” This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me: “not only are thieves” gives us a subject and a verb, but the “but also” is followed only by a verb.

Plus, “to sell” seems to only modify “contract bidding plans”, and that’s not quite right: the thieves are selling the strategies and specifications, too. (A) makes much more sense than (D).

Quote:
E. but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling
The parallelism is much more thoroughly flawed in (E). We have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfering valuable information…” Definitely not parallel. (E) is out, and (A) is the correct answer.
Show more

Dear GMATNinja,

First of all, wishing you a very happy Christmas and a very happy upcoming new year!

While parallelism is undoubtedly faulty in all of the incorrect answer choices, there is the below split which I used to eliminate options B and C straightaway. It would be great if you can through some light on the split and review my approach.

My understanding of the correct version:
Correct version - valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans
Out of all the varieties of valuable information available these thieves pilfered 3 pieces i.e. business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

My understanding of the versions in B and C:
Usage in B - valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans
Usage in C - valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

What I understand is that the thieves pilfered all the available varieties of valuable information (against only the 3 specified in the correct version) and part of what they pilfered included business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

Warm Regards,
Pritishd
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,779
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,779
 [2]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 30 Dec 2019, 20:34
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pritishd
Dear GMATNinja,

First of all, wishing you a very happy Christmas and a very happy upcoming new year!

While parallelism is undoubtedly faulty in all of the incorrect answer choices, there is the below split which I used to eliminate options B and C straightaway. It would be great if you can through some light on the split and review my approach.

My understanding of the correct version:
Correct version - valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans
Out of all the varieties of valuable information available these thieves pilfered 3 pieces i.e. business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

My understanding of the versions in B and C:
Usage in B - valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans
Usage in C - valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

What I understand is that the thieves pilfered all the available varieties of valuable information (against only the 3 specified in the correct version) and part of what they pilfered included business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans

Warm Regards,
Pritishd
Show more
First of all, I certainly don't think the distinction between 1) "valuable information such as", 2) "valuable information that includes", and 3) "valuable information including" is enough to eliminate anything, so I honestly don't think it's worth splitting hairs here.

That said, I'm not sure I entirely agree with your interpretation. In choice (A), we are told that the thieves can pilfer valuable information. We are then given a few examples of types of information that can be pilfered: 1) business development strategies, 2) new product specifications, and 3) contract bidding plans. Does that mean that the thieves can ONLY steal those three types of valuable information? No -- those are just three examples.

You could argue that (B) and (C) have a slightly different shade of meaning. In these two, it seems like the ONLY types of valuable information that can be pilfered are the types that include 1) business development strategies, 2) new product specifications, and 3) contract bidding plans. Does that mean that valuable information that does NOT include those three things cannot be pilfered? It's not totally clear.

Again, that is certainly not a reason to eliminate (B) and (C). Luckily, we have much bigger fish to fry (i.e. parallelism), and (A) makes the most sense: the thieves can pilfer valuable information, and "such as" is properly used to introduce three examples of valuable information that can be pilfered.

navderm
Great post, as always.
I have a question though. You mentioned that in (D), 'to sell' seems to modify only 'contract bidding plans'. But I understood 'to sell' to modify 'pilfer valuable information' hence written correctly here. Could you shed more light on why you think 'to sell' modifies only 'contract bidding plans'.
Show more
Let's compare the following:

  • "I packed a sleeping bag, a tent, and coffee to drink in the morning." - In this case, "to drink..." clearly modifies coffee, not "packed".
  • "... pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell..." - Does "to sell" modify "contract bidding plans" or "pilfer"? Well, "to sell" is right next to "contract bidding plans" and that's a good place to put something that modifies "contract bidding plans" (just as "to drink" modifies "coffee" in the previous example). Could "to sell" modify "pilfer"? Sure... that's certainly the more logical interpretation. The problem is that the meaning isn't clear, and (D) lends itself to an inaccurate interpretation. The correct meaning is much more clear in choice (A).

Regardless, the parallelism issue allows us to eliminate (D) without question, so we don't need to rely on this detail.

I hope this helps!
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 16 Mar 2020, 08:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja


Quote:
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
OK, now we really do have a “not only… but also” structure, which means that we need to think about parallelism again. There’s not much wiggle-room here: whatever follows “not only” needs to be parallel to whatever follows “but also.”

So we have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfer valuable information…” This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me: “not only are thieves” gives us a subject and a verb, but the “but also” is followed only by a verb.

Show more
GMATNinja
Hello sir,
Thanks for the nice explanation.
I've a query on your explanation on the basis of choice D.
What if I say the following sentence?
GMATNinja not only scored the perfect score in GRE but also scored the perfect score in GMAT.
In this example, We've used 'GMATNinja' as subject and 'scored' as verb, but we did not use any 'subject' for the 'but also' part. It seems that the above sentence is still right. So, why NOT D (at least with the point of 'subject and verb' issue)?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,779
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,779
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 02 Apr 2020, 08:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Asad
GMATNinja


Quote:
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
OK, now we really do have a “not only… but also” structure, which means that we need to think about parallelism again. There’s not much wiggle-room here: whatever follows “not only” needs to be parallel to whatever follows “but also.”

So we have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfer valuable information…” This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me: “not only are thieves” gives us a subject and a verb, but the “but also” is followed only by a verb.

GMATNinja
Hello sir,
Thanks for the nice explanation.
I've a query on your explanation on the basis of choice D.
What if I say the following sentence?
GMATNinja not only scored the perfect score in GRE but also scored the perfect score in GMAT.
In this example, We've used 'GMATNinja' as subject and 'scored' as verb, but we did not use any 'subject' for the 'but also' part. It seems that the above sentence is still right. So, why NOT D (at least with the point of 'subject and verb' issue)?
Show more
In your example, "GMATNinja" comes before the "not only... but also" structure. That means that the subject, "GMATNinja", is actually shared by both parts.

In case that isn't clear, consider these two examples:

  • "Asad (1) studied for the GMAT and (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we have two parallel verbs ("studied" and "was") that clearly share the subject "Asad". No problem at all.
  • "Asad not only (1) studied for the GMAT but also (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we basically have the same thing, but with a "not only... but also" structure. As with the simple "and" structure in the previous example, the two parallel verbs share the subject "Asad". Again, no problem at all!

I hope that helps!
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 12 Apr 2020, 08:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Asad

GMATNinja
Hello sir,
Thanks for the nice explanation.
I've a query on your explanation on the basis of choice D.
What if I say the following sentence?
GMATNinja not only scored the perfect score in GRE but also scored the perfect score in GMAT.
In this example, We've used 'GMATNinja' as subject and 'scored' as verb, but we did not use any 'subject' for the 'but also' part. It seems that the above sentence is still right. So, why NOT D (at least with the point of 'subject and verb' issue)?
In your example, "GMATNinja" comes before the "not only... but also" structure. That means that the subject, "GMATNinja", is actually shared by both parts.

In case that isn't clear, consider these two examples:

  • "Asad (1) studied for the GMAT and (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we have two parallel verbs ("studied" and "was") that clearly share the subject "Asad". No problem at all.
  • "Asad not only (1) studied for the GMAT but also (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we basically have the same thing, but with a "not only... but also" structure. As with the simple "and" structure in the previous example, the two parallel verbs share the subject "Asad". Again, no problem at all!

I hope that helps!
Show more
GMATNinja
Thank you sir for the response.
So, it seems that there is no problem in the parallelism issue. But, i asked this question because you said that This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me.
So, we can't cross out choice D on the basis of parallelism issue, right?


Curiosity to know: Sir, how do you know that i am a fan of ''Stanford''? :) :? :) :? :) :?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,779
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,779
 [2]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat Updated on: 22 May 2020, 08:24
Originally posted by GMATNinja on 28 Apr 2020, 08:22.
Last edited by GMATNinjaTwo on 22 May 2020, 08:24, edited 1 time in total.
fixed typo
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Asad
GMATNinja
Asad

GMATNinja
Hello sir,
Thanks for the nice explanation.
I've a query on your explanation on the basis of choice D.
What if I say the following sentence?
GMATNinja not only scored the perfect score in GRE but also scored the perfect score in GMAT.
In this example, We've used 'GMATNinja' as subject and 'scored' as verb, but we did not use any 'subject' for the 'but also' part. It seems that the above sentence is still right. So, why NOT D (at least with the point of 'subject and verb' issue)?
In your example, "GMATNinja" comes before the "not only... but also" structure. That means that the subject, "GMATNinja", is actually shared by both parts.

In case that isn't clear, consider these two examples:

  • "Asad (1) studied for the GMAT and (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we have two parallel verbs ("studied" and "was") that clearly share the subject "Asad". No problem at all.
  • "Asad not only (1) studied for the GMAT but also (2) was admitted to Stanford." - Here we basically have the same thing, but with a "not only... but also" structure. As with the simple "and" structure in the previous example, the two parallel verbs share the subject "Asad". Again, no problem at all!

I hope that helps!
GMATNinja
Thank you sir for the response.
So, it seems that there is no problem in the parallelism issue. But, i asked this question because you said that This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me.
So, we can't cross out choice D on the basis of parallelism issue, right?


Curiosity to know: Sir, how do you know that i am a fan of ''Stanford''? :) :? :) :? :) :?
Show more
Lucky guess -- who on this forum isn't a fan of Stanford?? ;)

The structure in choice (D) is entirely different than the structure in the examples from the last couple posts.

The parallelism in choice (D) is more like this: "Not only is Asad a fan of Stanford but also studies for the GMAT." I said that this isn't awful because we do have a verb after both the "not only" and the "but also". However, the first item contains a subject and a verb while the second item only contains a verb. That's why the parallelism isn't great in (D) and why (A) is a better option.

Choice (A) doesn't have a not only/but also structure, so it avoids the parallelism concern associated with that structure. Instead, (A) gives us something akin to, "Not only is Asad a fan of Stanford, but he also studies for the GMAT."

And as I attempted to explain in this post, just because you have the phrase "not only" does NOT automatically mean that you need a corresponding "but also" part.

I hope that helps a bit! And go Cardinals?
User avatar
Kunni
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2019
Last visit: 07 Mar 2021
Posts: 29
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 32
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Posts: 29
Kudos: 3
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 19 May 2020, 05:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Daagh, you're bringing this to a whole new level of grammar intensity! Always fun. (And yes, apparently I'm a grammar nerd or something. I guess it says that in my job title...?)

Disclaimer: unless you really love grammar, just stop reading right now. This isn't an important rant for most test-takers -- there are dozens (hundreds?) of far more important things to worry about on the GMAT.

OK, so answer choice (A) has three components:

Quote:
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated

So component #1 is clearly a dependent clause. On to #2:

Quote:
not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts

Ah, here it is: this can't stand alone as a sentence, either. Sure, it doesn't have a standard "marker" that "turns" an independent clause into a dependent clause (although, but, and, because, etc.), but it's still a dependent clause: it has a subject and a verb, but can't stand alone -- at least not the way it's written in (A).

So we have two dependent clauses so far. On to part #3:

Quote:
they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.

And there's our independent clause. So we don't have a comma splice here, and GMAC didn't actually make a mistake in this case -- it's just that the middle clause is super-sneaky.

I hope this helps! And seriously: if you're not daagh and you didn't follow this explanation, please don't worry about it. Again, parallelism and other issues are way more important here.
Show more

GMATNinja I rejected A because ", and send the data to competitors." .

, and is used to connect two Independent clauses. but in this there is no Subject. Its in the previous clause. Please advise.

Thanks
Kunal
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
39
 [1]
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 39
 [1]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 10 Jun 2020, 11:13
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinjaTwo
I agree with eddy8700... parallelism is an issue in choice D because "not only" is followed by a subject and a verb (subject: "thieves", verb: "are"); therefore, "but also" would also need to be followed by a subject and a verb. In choice D, "but also" is followed only by the verb "pilfer", but no subject. Consider the following example: "Not only do you play tennis, but also coach rugby." This is incorrect for the same reason. Instead, you could use "Not only do you play tennis, but you also coach rugby." or "You not only play tennis but also coach rugby."

Similarly, the following sentence, which mimics choice D, is acceptable: "Thieves not only divert cash from company bank accounts but also pilfer valuable information." ("not only" + verb... "but also" + verb)
Show more


HI GMATNinja,

Is it necessary to have the verb first after not only if the verb is not before Not only structure?
For example, is it correct to say: Not only i play tennis but also i play rugby./Not only i play tennis but i also play rugby/Not only do i play tennis but i also play rugby?
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
39
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 39
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 10 Jun 2020, 11:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.


A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell ---- There are two acts the thieves do such as 1. pilfer X, Y, and Z and 2. sell the date. The best choice as I see.

B. they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling ---and selling is unparallel

C. also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling -- also preferring is an outright fragment

D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell -- not only are thieves' is not parallel to 'but also pilfer'

E. but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling -- 'but also pilfering' is a fragment.
Show more

Hi Daagh/any expert,

Can't thieves be an implied subject after but also, just as we have in some cases of ellipses?
avatar
Krishchamp
avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2020
Last visit: 20 Nov 2023
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 88
Posts: 39
Kudos: 4
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 23 Jun 2020, 22:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
So I've seen a lot of test-takers make mistakes on this question, usually because of overreliance on an idiom “rule” that doesn’t really exist. If you see the phrase “not only”, that does NOT automatically mean that you need to have a “but also” somewhere else in the sentence! There’s no reason why you couldn’t use the phrase “not only” by itself, as long as it makes logical sense with the context of the sentence.

Don’t get me wrong: “not… but” phrases are pretty important on the GMAT, but only because they require parallelism. Basically, whatever follows the word “not” (or “not only”) must be structurally parallel to whatever follows the word “but” (or “but also”). (Similar parallelism rules apply to both/and and either/or constructions – more on these in an upcoming Topic of the Week.)

But again, there’s nothing wrong with having “not only” without the “but also.”

Quote:
A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
“They” jumps out at me right away, but I think it’s fine, since it refers to “thieves.” I suppose “they” could also refer to “bank accounts,” but I don’t think the pronoun is automatically wrong. Ambiguity isn’t an absolute rule (see our YouTube webinar on this pronouns for more), and “they” isn’t particularly confusing here.

The parallelism also seems OK, even if it doesn’t sound great. We have two different lists going on in (A). First, we have a pair of parallel verbs: “…they can also pilfer information… and sell data…” That seems fine. We also have a list of the types of information that thieves pilfer: “…such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans…” That’s just three parallel nouns – no problem. Keep (A).

Quote:
B. they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling
(B) is very similar to (A), except that the final “and” is followed by “selling.” And that’s a problem, because I don’t know what “selling” is parallel to: nothing in the sentence is in the same format. Logically, “selling” should be parallel to “pilfer”, but in that case, it should be “…they pilfer… and sell…”, as in answer choice (A). (B) can be eliminated.

Quote:
C. also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling
The big change here is that “pilfering” and “selling” are now “-ing” words – modifiers, in this case. (Feel free to check out our guide to “-ing” words for more on this topic.)

But that doesn’t really make any sense. “As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, pilfering valuable information…” For this to be correct, “pilfering valuable information” would have to modify “not only are thieves able to divert cash…” – and it simply doesn’t. These are completely different types of criminal activity, and the “pilfering valuable information” does not modify “diverting cash.”

Similarly, “selling” is basically hanging out on its own. I guess it’s trying to modify the previous phrase beginning with “pilfering”, but I can’t make much sense of that, either. (C) is out.

Quote:
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
OK, now we really do have a “not only… but also” structure, which means that we need to think about parallelism again. There’s not much wiggle-room here: whatever follows “not only” needs to be parallel to whatever follows “but also.”

So we have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfer valuable information…” This isn’t awful, but it doesn’t quite seem parallel to me: “not only are thieves” gives us a subject and a verb, but the “but also” is followed only by a verb.

Plus, “to sell” seems to only modify “contract bidding plans”, and that’s not quite right: the thieves are selling the strategies and specifications, too. (A) makes much more sense than (D).

Quote:
E. but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling
The parallelism is much more thoroughly flawed in (E). We have: “not only are thieves able to divert cash… but also pilfering valuable information…” Definitely not parallel. (E) is out, and (A) is the correct answer.
Show more

So in option C, according to you then what does "pilfering valuable information" refer to? It seems that it is correctly refering to "not only are thieves able to divert cash…”. Can you please elaborate more on this?
avatar
miiicho
avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2019
Last visit: 21 Dec 2024
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
35
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 6
Kudos: 35
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 02 Jul 2020, 12:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone please explain why the "," after bidding plans is needed?

"they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell"

why is the following not correct?

they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and sell (without the comma after bidding)

I've read so many webpages on comma rules and can't seem to find a rule for why there needs to be a comma there. I understand it "looks" better in that it separates the list "strategies... and bidding plans..." from "and sell..." but can't seem to find any definitive rule anywhere on why this is the case.

Thanks for the help in advance.
User avatar
Harsh2111s
User avatar
Joined: 08 May 2019
Last visit: 10 Feb 2021
Posts: 317
Own Kudos:
266
 [2]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
Schools: IIM (D) S.P.Jain Institute (A) XLRI IIML-IPMX '22 NUS '23
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: IIM (D) S.P.Jain Institute (A) XLRI IIML-IPMX '22 NUS '23
Posts: 317
Kudos: 266
 [2]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 04 Jul 2020, 07:01
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
miiicho
Can someone please explain why the "," after bidding plans is needed?

"they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell"

why is the following not correct?

they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and sell (without the comma after bidding)

I've read so many webpages on comma rules and can't seem to find a rule for why there needs to be a comma there. I understand it "looks" better in that it separates the list "strategies... and bidding plans..." from "and sell..." but can't seem to find any definitive rule anywhere on why this is the case.

Thanks for the help in advance.
Show more
miiicho
You are correct but better looking is not the only reason.
The sentence should make sense thus "comma" is necessary to separate strategies and other phrase.
If you have two independent clauses on either side of an "and", then you definitely need a comma before the "and".
Hope it helps :)
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat Updated on: 02 Aug 2020, 12:57
Originally posted by TheUltimateWinner on 02 Aug 2020, 11:35.
Last edited by TheUltimateWinner on 02 Aug 2020, 12:57, edited 2 times in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
EducationAisle
RatneshS
If we had a construction as;;;As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, thieves not only are able to divert cash from company bank accounts, but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell the data to competitors.
Would this be a right construction? I asked this question because I want to understand the reasoning for the end part of 2 options,
A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
VS
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
Hi Ratnesh, generally with a not only...but also structure, the verb is outside of the idiomatic construct. So, a better sentence would be:

....thieves can not only divert cash from company bank accounts but also pilfer valuable information...

Even in the sentence that you have suggested, at the very least, I would add a can to the second part, so as to not change the meaning of the original sentence.

...thieves not only are able to divert cash from company bank accounts, but also can pilfer valuable information....
Show more

EducationAisle
So, do you think that it'll still make sense if we remove 'they' from the correct sentence (A)?
EducationAisle
Actually not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts is also not an IC. The presence of not only clearly indicates that there is something else to follow.

In fact, the real lesson to learn from this sentence is that not only need not necessarily be followed by but also.
Show more
The correct sentence:
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.
EducationAisle
Quote:
The presence of not only clearly indicates that there is something else to follow.
Show more
If this is the real case, "they can also pilfer valuable information...." is also NOT an IC! The same reason that you put is: The presence of also clearly indicates that there is something else to follow.
Could you share your thought, please?
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 02 Aug 2020, 23:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheUltimateWinner
So, do you think that it'll still make sense if we remove 'they' from the correct sentence (A)?
Show more
Hi TheUltimateWinner, without they, option A will be:

As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.

Is this what you are suggesting?
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 03 Aug 2020, 01:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheUltimateWinner
EducationAisle
RatneshS
If we had a construction as;;;As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, thieves not only are able to divert cash from company bank accounts, but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell the data to competitors.
Would this be a right construction? I asked this question because I want to understand the reasoning for the end part of 2 options,
A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
VS
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
Hi Ratnesh, generally with a not only...but also structure, the verb is outside of the idiomatic construct. So, a better sentence would be:

....thieves can not only divert cash from company bank accounts but also pilfer valuable information...

Even in the sentence that you have suggested, at the very least, I would add a can to the second part, so as to not change the meaning of the original sentence.

...thieves not only are able to divert cash from company bank accounts, but also can pilfer valuable information....

EducationAisle
So, do you think that it'll still make sense if we remove 'they' from the correct sentence (A)?
Show more
EducationAisle
TheUltimateWinner
So, do you think that it'll still make sense if we remove 'they' from the correct sentence (A)?
Hi TheUltimateWinner, without they, option A will be:

As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.

Is this what you are suggesting?
Show more
EducationAisle
No.
In the highlighted part, you did not put 'they'. My question is: is that highlighted part that you suggests to RatneshS is correct without 'they'?
I'm asking this because it does not make sense to me, but i still don't know why it does not make sense to me :) !
Also, i don't know why did you put COMMA before 'but also'?
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 04 Aug 2020, 03:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheUltimateWinner
In the highlighted part, you did not put 'they'.
Show more
Hi TheUltimateWinner, the version suggested above is:

thieves not only are able to divert cash from company bank accounts, but also pilfer valuable information

Notice that the parallelism here is:

Not only X But also Y

So, X and Y have to parallel. Here, the parallelism is between two verbs: are and pilfer.

Hence, we cannot put they in this version.
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts