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
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 17 Aug 2021, 12:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
GMATNinja
aritrar4
GMATNinja I really liked your explanation of the "not only / but also" rigidity that we tend to follow and how it is flexible in context of a sentence. However, I came across the below sentence in the MGMAT question bank which discarded a choice for not following the "not only / but also" idiom. Is "but" required to follow a "not only" in a sentence?

https://gmatclub.com/forum/not-only-did ... ml#p761279

Posted from my mobile device
Going back to what we said in an earlier post,

    "the not/but structure generally demands strict parallelism, but if one of those is missing, then it’s a totally different structure. You could have the word “not” without the “but”, and vice-versa... whenever you see a phrase with BOTH “not” and “but”, your priority is to think about parallelism first, and meaning second."

So if you HAVE a "not (only)/but (also)," then you need to check out the parallelism. That said, "but" is not required every time you see a "not only" in a sentence.

Keep in mind that the example you are referencing is not an official question, so I wouldn't get too hung up on it ;) .

Hi GMATNinja - i think what you said in the purple is difficult to digest because we are so accustomed to see Not Only ...But Also | Not Only ...But |

I have tried making some sentences with Not | Not only without the But and I found it strange !

For sentences with Not | Not only without the But, I am presuming parallelism is NOT IMPORTANT as the 2nd element in these sentences will always be a clause ?

i) Not only is Sam tall, Sam is strong [X element - clause | Y element - clause]
ii) Sam is not only tall, he is strong also [X element - adjective| Y element - clause]
iii) Sam is not tall, he is short [X element - adjective|Y element - clause]
iv) Samantha is not tired, she is full of energy [X element - adjective| Y element - clause]

Can I assume all these 4 sentences are accurate even though in sentence ii) | iii) and iv) - the X elements are adjectives whereas the Y element is always a clause ?
Show more
It's better to think about "not only" parallelism within a broad framework than to try to anticipate every individual construction you might encounter. So here's how I'd think about it:

  • First, see what form follows "not only."
  • Next, check to see if the parallel form shows up in the second part of the construction. If you see "but" or "but also" the form should show up immediately after. If there is no "but," the form will likely show up after the comma that marks the end of the first clause.

So let's apply that analysis to your four examples.

Quote:
i) Not only is Sam tall, Sam is strong [X element - clause | Y element - clause]
Show more
After "not only," we get a full clause. After the comma we get a parallel clause. So the parallelism looks okay here.

Just note that in every similar official example we've seen, there's been an "also" in the second construction. I wouldn't say this is a rule, but the "also" helps to clarify to the reader how the clauses are related, so the GMAT would prefer the sentence, "Not only is Sam tall, he is also strong."

Quote:
ii) Sam is not only tall, he is strong also [X element - adjective| Y element - clause]
Show more
As you noted, after "not only," we get an adjective, and after the comma, we get a full clause, so the parallelism is faulty here.

Quote:
iii) Sam is not tall, he is short [X element - adjective|Y element - clause]
Show more
Same parallelism issue with ii, but now, because each clause could stand on its own, we have a run-on sentence too, so this construction is incorrect.

Quote:
iv) Samantha is not tired, she is full of energy [X element - adjective| Y element - clause]
Show more
Same two issues with iii, so this example is also incorrect.

The takeaway: we're always better off using official examples to understand how proper parallelism operates. Don't overcomplicate your analysis. If the grammatical form that follows "not only" doesn't appear in the second clause, the parallelism is off. If it does appear, but it seems funky, or you're not 100% sure if it works properly, try to use another decision point.

I hope that helps!
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 23 Aug 2021, 11:50
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gurmeet2022
In reference to choice D

not only are thieves 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.

Choice D is also wrong for the reason that "are thieves" are inside the "not only" and "but also" ......... Thieves should act as subject for X & Y......

Basically, my query is ..... in constructions like
......Subject....... not only X but also Y
The subject should match with X and Y.
i.e. ..... "Subject + X" and "Subject + Y" should make sense......

Am I right........?????
Please guide
Show more
Yes, in general, the elements in a "not only/but also" construction should both match up with what precedes the "not only/but also" section of the sentence. For example:

    1) "I love not only the Red Sox but also their fans." - In this case, "the Red Sox" and "their fans" both match up with "I love..." ("I love the Red Sox" and "I love their fans").
    2) "I not only love the Red Sox but also like their fans." - This one is a little different because we have parallel verbs ("love" and "like"), and both verbs match up with "I" in this case ("I love the Red Sox" and "I like their fans").

For more on why the parallelism is off in (D), check out this post.

I hope that helps a bit!
avatar
shivambangia
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2021
Last visit: 05 Sep 2022
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 11
Posts: 7
Kudos: 1
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 08 Sep 2021, 03:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,
I read using "comma" + "and" needs to have an IC post that.
Only option D follows this rule.
Does this rule have an exception?
User avatar
100mitra
User avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2019
Last visit: 06 Jul 2022
Posts: 714
Own Kudos:
629
Given Kudos: 49
Status:Learning
Posts: 714
Kudos: 629
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 09 Sep 2021, 09:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Correct option : A

Sentence Exam on :
- Parallelism list at End of sentence
- they pronoun refer to thieves

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
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 10 Sep 2021, 16:07
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shivambangia
Hi,
I read using "comma" + "and" needs to have an IC post that.
Only option D follows this rule.
Does this rule have an exception?
Show more
Cardinal rule #1 of SC: do not invent rules! :)

There is no rule that "comma + and" must introduce an independent clause. The construction could introduce the last element in a list: "Tim likes basketball, hockey, and jai alai."

The comma could be setting off a non-essential modifier. "Tim likes basketball, which he is terrible at, and hockey."

The takeaway: if "comma + and" isn't introducing an independent clause, do not assume you're looking at an error! You still have to reason your way through the logic of the sentence. Always.

I hope that clears things up!
avatar
kunalc20
avatar
Joined: 17 May 2016
Last visit: 10 Apr 2022
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 33
GMAT 1: 590 Q47 V25
GMAT 1: 590 Q47 V25
Posts: 20
Kudos: 9
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 02 Jan 2022, 02:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja, AnishPassi , egmat , EducationAisle
KarishmaB , ChiranjeevSingh
,Bunuel
I have a doubt in option A: In the sentence 'not only' is followed by a clause and 'also' is followed by a verb 'pilfer' and it doesn't have subject (subject 'they' is present but it is before 'also'), so not sure how this usage is correct and how both can be parallel, so could you please explain.

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
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [2]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [2]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 04 Jan 2022, 01:26
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kunalc20

I have a doubt in option A: In the sentence 'not only' is followed by a clause and 'also' is followed by a verb 'pilfer' and it doesn't have subject (subject 'they' is present but it is before 'also'), so not sure how this usage is correct and how both can be parallel, so could you please explain.

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
Show more
I am wondering if you are trying to draw parallels with "not only....but also..". This isn't using that structure.

"they" is indeed the subject of "pilfer"; the presence of "also" doesn't really make any difference to subject-verb pair.
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 10 Jan 2022, 12:12
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kunalc20
Hi GMATNinja, AnishPassi Sir, I have a doubt in option A: In the sentence 'not only' is followed by a clause and 'also' is followed by a verb 'pilfer' and it doesn't have subject (subject 'they' is present but it is before 'also'), so not sure how this usage is correct and how both can be parallel, so could you please explain.

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
Show more
This drives a lot of people crazy. Just know that if the construction is "not only... but," the second half of the parallelism will begin after the "but." If there is no "but," the second half of the parallelism will begin after the comma.

Put another way, "also" is not a parallel marker. It's just an adverb.

For example:

    "Not only does Tim root for the Sacramento Kings, he also has a poster of Marvin Bagley blowing a wide-open dunk."

Here, the parallel elements are "does Tim root" and "he also has," and both of those are full clauses. So this is okay.

Same deal in (A). The two parallel elements are "are thieves" and "they can also pilfer," both of which clauses. That's not a problem. (Note that "are thieves" just has the subject-verb order inverted. "Thieves" is the subject in this case, so we still have a full clause.)

I hope that clears things up!
User avatar
GraceSCKao
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2021
Last visit: 18 Dec 2022
Posts: 124
Own Kudos:
54
Given Kudos: 1,247
Location: Taiwan
Schools: Columbia CBS '24 Darden '24 LBS '24 Wharton '24
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V39
Schools: Columbia CBS '24 Darden '24 LBS '24 Wharton '24
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V39
Posts: 124
Kudos: 54
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 12 Jan 2022, 07:56
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
Hi GMATNinja,

This question is so classic that we are still discussing it in 2022....(and the community has five pages of discussion already!)

I have checked all the previous posts but one question still hovers in my mind: why is this sentence "not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts" not an independent clause? Why cannot it stand alone? Is it because this sentence begins with "not only"? I hope to confirm as I have never read relevant rules before.

I could see that this sentence is inverted and the following was my idea when I practiced this question: its meaning was similar to "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts." So, when I flipped the sentence, I adjusted the word order of NOT ONLY too and transferred the sentence into "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts." Then, as I got an independent clause, I needed a conjunction before the second independent clause and only options (D) and (E) got "but." So, I eliminated (A), (B) and (C).

I chose (E) as I (incorrectly) thought that since I got "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts," I could use "but also pilfering....and selling..." (Thieves are not only able to... but also pilfering....and selling....just my idea before finding that no other flipped the sentence as I did.)

I know that we do not need to stick with the NOT ONLY...BUT ALSO idiom, but the lack of conjunction in option (A), (B) and (C) really bothers me. Could you elaborate more on why "not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts" is a dependent clause?

And, when we have an inverted sentence, do we just flip the verb and subject and leave everything else as is?

Thank in advance for your time and response. :)
avatar
kunalc20
avatar
Joined: 17 May 2016
Last visit: 10 Apr 2022
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
9
 [1]
Given Kudos: 33
GMAT 1: 590 Q47 V25
GMAT 1: 590 Q47 V25
Posts: 20
Kudos: 9
 [1]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 12 Jan 2022, 11:42
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks so much GMATNinja , Got it now
User avatar
AnishPassi
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
661
 [1]
Given Kudos: 18
Status:GMAT Coach
Affiliations: The GMAT Co.
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Posts: 112
Kudos: 661
 [1]
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 17 Jan 2022, 06:09
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kunalc20
Hi GMATNinja, AnishPassi , egmat , EducationAisle
KarishmaB , ChiranjeevSingh
,Bunuel
I have a doubt in option A: In the sentence 'not only' is followed by a clause and 'also' is followed by a verb 'pilfer' and it doesn't have subject (subject 'they' is present but it is before 'also'), so not sure how this usage is correct and how both can be parallel, so could you please explain.

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
Show more

GMATNinja gave a great explanation. I’ll add one point:

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

The sentence doesn’t actually have the word ‘but’, but the contrast begins after the comma. I have added ‘but’ in brackets above to highlight where the contrast starts. So, that’s why the clause after ‘not only’ needs to be parallel with the clause after the comma.
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 18 Jan 2022, 15:39
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GraceSCKao
Hi GMATNinja,

This question is so classic that we are still discussing it in 2022....(and the community has five pages of discussion already!)

I have checked all the previous posts but one question still hovers in my mind: why is this sentence "not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts" not an independent clause? Why cannot it stand alone? Is it because this sentence begins with "not only"? I hope to confirm as I have never read relevant rules before.

I could see that this sentence is inverted and the following was my idea when I practiced this question: its meaning was similar to "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts." So, when I flipped the sentence, I adjusted the word order of NOT ONLY too and transferred the sentence into "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts." Then, as I got an independent clause, I needed a conjunction before the second independent clause and only options (D) and (E) got "but." So, I eliminated (A), (B) and (C).

I chose (E) as I (incorrectly) thought that since I got "thieves are not only able to divert cash from company bank accounts," I could use "but also pilfering....and selling..." (Thieves are not only able to... but also pilfering....and selling....just my idea before finding that no other flipped the sentence as I did.)

I know that we do not need to stick with the NOT ONLY...BUT ALSO idiom, but the lack of conjunction in option (A), (B) and (C) really bothers me. Could you elaborate more on why "not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts" is a dependent clause?

And, when we have an inverted sentence, do we just flip the verb and subject and leave everything else as is?

Thank in advance for your time and response. :)
Show more
Let's start with something easier:

  • "Tim is going to the grocery store." - Perfectly fine independent clause.
  • "Either Tim is going to the grocery store." - Um... or what?? The "either" causes the reader to expect something else. Sure, there's a subject and a verb, but without that something else, the sentence is incomplete and doesn't make any sense on its own.

Similarly:

  • "Tim is going to the grocery store." - Perfectly fine independent clause.
  • "Not only is Tim going to the grocery store." - Again something is missing. And this is actually worse than the "either" example above: if you drop the "either" from the second sentence above, you are indeed left with a perfectly fine independent clause. If you drop the "not only" here, you're left with "Is Tim going to the grocery store." The inverted word order makes this look like a question! This word order would never fly as a simple statement.

The "not only..." part in choice (A) wouldn't fly as an independent clause for those same reasons.

And if you're still bothered by the absence of a conjunction in (A), just think about this final set of examples:

  • "Tim is going to the grocery store." - Perfectly fine independent clause.
  • "Although Tim is going to the grocery store." - Not fine on its own.
  • "Although Tim is going to the grocery store, his kids are worried that he'll forget to buy essential items such as Skittles and Cap'n Crunch." - The "although" turns the first part into a dependent clause, so we don't need a conjunction after the comma. Same is true of the "not only" in (A). (Mmmm... Cap'n Crunch. :-P )

I hope that helps!
avatar
Dhwanii
avatar
Joined: 16 Mar 2021
Last visit: 04 Feb 2023
Posts: 73
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 96
Posts: 73
Kudos: 13
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 21 Mar 2022, 02:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can we use 'but also' without using 'not only' ?
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,193
Own Kudos:
4,759
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,193
Kudos: 4,759
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 21 Mar 2022, 05:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dhwanii
Can we use 'but also' without using 'not only' ?
Show more

Hello Dhwanii,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, "but also" can, indeed, be used without "not only".

For example, "I like the sun, but also like the rain."

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Aarya20
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2022
Last visit: 10 Oct 2022
Posts: 32
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 15
Location: India
GPA: 3.74
Posts: 32
Kudos: 3
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 19 Aug 2022, 08:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
@empowergmatrich Your explanation here will be much appreciated!!
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 23 Oct 2022, 13:27
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.

(A) they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
(B) they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling
(C) also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling
(D) but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
(E) but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling
Show more
Hi RonTargetTestPrep,
It seems that the following sentence is just awkward, isn't it?
The core:
Thieves are not only 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 (they can also) sell the data to competitors.
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 10 Oct 2023, 01:56
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.

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).

Show more
GMATNinja
Sir, hope you're fine.
How do we convinced that ''to sell'' does not modify ''strategies and specifications'' too? Very curious to know that...
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 02 Nov 2023, 12:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.

Option Elimination -
Beware of many deceptions GMAT has been using, especially in the "Not only...but also" idiom.
Not only X but also Y demands strict parallelism. Moreover, this construction places an equal significance on X and Y.
But if we need to present a contrast, we need X but Y. Here is a good deceiving question with X but also Y (don't jump to conclude and make a rule that it ok to use but also without not only. This question is an example of X but Y and not at all for the "not only but also" idiom. https://gmatclub.com/forum/not-only-did ... l#p3293065
Now, there is another deception with just "not only." Let's take an example: Not only was she a talented pianist, she was also a gifted painter. In this example, "not only" emphasizes the exceptional quality of the person's musical talent. And what is this "Not only was she a talented pianist"? Is it an independent clause? No. It's adverbial. Adverbial for what? For the subject and verb in the subsequent independent clause, "she was." With this understanding, let's look at the options.

(A) they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell - As introduces an adverbial. For what? For the subject and verb in the subsequent adverbial (remember adverbs can modify adverbs? Yes), "thieves are." Not only introduces another adverbial and emphasizes that thieves can divert cash from the company bank accounts. Adverbial for what? For subject + verb in the subsequent clause, "they can pilfer ...." Moreover, "they can pilfer and sell" is parallel. I know it broke our love with "not only but also," but the sentence is absolutely correct.

(B) they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling - "selling" parallel to what? Nothing.

(C) also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling - total crap. Comma + ING is adverbial. Here, it modifies what? "thieves can divert cash"? Seriously? Moreover, "selling" modifying what?

(D) but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell - "to sell" only limited to "contract bidding plans" and not others? Wrong.

(E) but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling - "not only but also needs strict parallelism. After not only do we have subject + verb, but after "but" also we have nothing as "pilfering" and "selling" without helping verbs are just verbals (modifiers).
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,836
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,836
Kudos: 986
As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticat 03 Jul 2025, 13:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
   1   2   3   4   5 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts