Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 27 Sep 2026, 01:23 |
It is currently 27 Sep 2026, 01:23 |
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 2807:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 28, 2026 - Oct. 16, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Sep 2911:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
" Description: Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thur Sept. 29, 2026 - Dec. 3, 2026, 11:00am-1:00pm EST
Oct 0107:00 AM BST
-08:00 AM GMT
Welcome to the GMAT Club's Free Interview Prep Event for Top MBA Programs! Buy tickets - Virtual series that’s all set to equip you to -excel in your MBA interviews.
Oct 0301:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Saturdays Oct. 3, 2026 - Dec. 26, 2026, 1:00pm-4:00pm EST
30 Jul 2018, 10:06
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi! I had a problem with the usage of "that" in option E. If we remove the part after first "that", "its" in the second half no longer refers to the elephant.
gupta,
I am afraid I couldn't get your point.
The part that follows the first 'that' is the subject of the relative clause. It is not a modifier contained within commas or dashes. There is no reason to remove it. If we remove the subject itself, then how will the pronoun have an antecedent?
I am afraid I couldn't get your point.
The part that follows the first 'that' is the subject of the relative clause. It is not a modifier contained within commas or dashes. There is no reason to remove it. If we remove the subject itself, then how will the pronoun have an antecedent?
12 Nov 2018, 08:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey, taking a couple steps back there's a good deal to learn here. A couple points:
1) Remember that clarity of meaning is a big emphasis with the error types that the GMAT tests. And here that extra "that" is there to make the meaning crystal clear, that the "and" connects two things that the evidence suggests:
We've found evidence that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal *and* that (the elephant's) trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Without that extra "that" it's easy for the reader to see two nouns separated by "and" and see them both as objects, both as things that the elephant descended from. For example, if I were to say "DNA tests suggests that I descended from Irish immigrants and my wife's family is from Sweden" - here you can read it as I descended from two family tree branches (Irish immigrants and my wife's family, which would be a little unnerving) or that two groups (me and my wife's family) have taken DNA tests. (Then the portion "is from Sweden" stands as a fragment, but it makes you go back and re-read to unpack which two things are connected by "and" and that slows the reader down and causes confusion). A "that" after "and" makes it clear that DNA tests suggest two things - one about me and one about my wife's family.
ALSO note that in the SC problem we're talking about there's an "its" right after "and" in some choices. This is another place where clarity can be very helpful. Does "its" mean "the elephant's" or "an aquatic animal's"? With the "that" in place in choice (E), it makes it parallel with "the elephant's":
Evidence suggests 1) that the elephant... and 2)that its
That parallelism signals that both portions of "the evidence suggests" are about the elephant, thereby removing potential confusion about what "its" refers to.
2) So keep in mind that parallel structures in these kinds of constructions exists to ensure clear meanings particularly when you have lots of nouns in a sentence and a tiny connector like "and" or "or" (and potentially some pronouns, too). Parallel structure isn't just a random piece of grammar that the GMAT arbitrarily decided to test - the GMAT tests it because it adds a "reading comprehension" logical component to SC. Which brings me to:
3) One place we love teaching students to look for decision points on SC is anywhere you see a coordinating conjunction (and, or, but, etc.) followed by a structural word like "that," "which," "to," etc. Those are great signals that you're likely dealing with a parallel structure issue, and help point you back to the other parallel structural word - if I see "and that" I'm immediately going back to find a previous "that" so that I can investigate for parallelism and clarity of meaning. If I see "or which" it's the same thing...where's that other "which" so that i can assess? Sometimes (like here) those construction show up in an answer choice, but other times they appear far from the underlined portion. And *that's* where they can be all the more crucial (I'm struggling to find a link to my favorite example of this but I'll grab it and drop it in here via edit function).
1) Remember that clarity of meaning is a big emphasis with the error types that the GMAT tests. And here that extra "that" is there to make the meaning crystal clear, that the "and" connects two things that the evidence suggests:
We've found evidence that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal *and* that (the elephant's) trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Without that extra "that" it's easy for the reader to see two nouns separated by "and" and see them both as objects, both as things that the elephant descended from. For example, if I were to say "DNA tests suggests that I descended from Irish immigrants and my wife's family is from Sweden" - here you can read it as I descended from two family tree branches (Irish immigrants and my wife's family, which would be a little unnerving) or that two groups (me and my wife's family) have taken DNA tests. (Then the portion "is from Sweden" stands as a fragment, but it makes you go back and re-read to unpack which two things are connected by "and" and that slows the reader down and causes confusion). A "that" after "and" makes it clear that DNA tests suggest two things - one about me and one about my wife's family.
ALSO note that in the SC problem we're talking about there's an "its" right after "and" in some choices. This is another place where clarity can be very helpful. Does "its" mean "the elephant's" or "an aquatic animal's"? With the "that" in place in choice (E), it makes it parallel with "the elephant's":
Evidence suggests 1) that the elephant... and 2)that its
That parallelism signals that both portions of "the evidence suggests" are about the elephant, thereby removing potential confusion about what "its" refers to.
2) So keep in mind that parallel structures in these kinds of constructions exists to ensure clear meanings particularly when you have lots of nouns in a sentence and a tiny connector like "and" or "or" (and potentially some pronouns, too). Parallel structure isn't just a random piece of grammar that the GMAT arbitrarily decided to test - the GMAT tests it because it adds a "reading comprehension" logical component to SC. Which brings me to:
3) One place we love teaching students to look for decision points on SC is anywhere you see a coordinating conjunction (and, or, but, etc.) followed by a structural word like "that," "which," "to," etc. Those are great signals that you're likely dealing with a parallel structure issue, and help point you back to the other parallel structural word - if I see "and that" I'm immediately going back to find a previous "that" so that I can investigate for parallelism and clarity of meaning. If I see "or which" it's the same thing...where's that other "which" so that i can assess? Sometimes (like here) those construction show up in an answer choice, but other times they appear far from the underlined portion. And *that's* where they can be all the more crucial (I'm struggling to find a link to my favorite example of this but I'll grab it and drop it in here via edit function).
TheUltimateWinner
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Last visit: 29 Aug 2026
Posts: 2,464
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,990
Concentration: Finance, Technology
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
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: 2,464
Kudos:
2,515
Updated on: 26 Jan 2019, 19:00
Originally posted by TheUltimateWinner on 20 Jan 2019, 17:55.
Last edited by TheUltimateWinner on 26 Jan 2019, 19:00, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by TheUltimateWinner on 26 Jan 2019, 19:00, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi my honorable experts MartyMurray, DmitryFarber, AjiteshArun, GMATNinja, ccooley.
This question makes me confused!
I'm just talking about E. Here, the correct sentence is:
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
This sentence works like------
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest
a) that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal (x)
and
b) that its trunk originally evolved (y)
So, the whole sentence looks like----
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest x and y. This sentence will also be fine if I say: Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest Mr. Robert and Mr. John.
This x and y should be equivalent to some activities (like tense or clause) to make the original sentence legitimate. We can't say that ''I have found evidence to suggest pen (x) and paper (y)''. We should write the activities of 'pen and paper'. So, the complete sentence will be something like below.
I have found evidence to suggest pen is used to write something on the answer script and paper is used for making answer script.
In the above sentence, there should have a conjunction like THAT to animate the part ''I have found evidence to suggest''. So, the correct sentence will be:
I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script and paper is used for making answer script.
In the above sentence, I suggested two things simultaneously. So, if I break down the whole sentence into several parts, then the sentence will be like following.
I have found evidence to suggest THAT
1) pen is used to write something on the answer script
and
2) paper is used for making answer script.
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script.
2/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT paper is used for making answer script.
Now, if I write the sentence like below, then it'll be...
I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script and THAT paper is used for making answer script.
If I breakdown this sentence, then it'll be...
I have found evidence to suggest THAT
a) pen is used to write something on the answer script
and
b) THAT paper is used for making answer script.
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll NOT work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script.
--->OK
2/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT THAT paper is used for making answer script.
---->NOT OK
SAME thing is happened in the original sentence of Official Guide!
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Now, if I break down this sentence into several parts it'll be....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that
a) the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal
and
b) that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll NOT work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal.
----->OK
2/ Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
-----> NOT OK (doesn't make sense to me!)
Again,
if we break down the original sentence into several parts like below, then it'll be....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest
a) that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal (X)
b) that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel (Y)
The whole sentence is something like below....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest X and Y.
So, the above sentence is ''SENTENCE FRAGMENT''
Correct me if my understanding is wrong, please!
This question makes me confused!
Quote:
I'm just talking about E. Here, the correct sentence is:
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
This sentence works like------
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest
a) that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal (x)
and
b) that its trunk originally evolved (y)
So, the whole sentence looks like----
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest x and y. This sentence will also be fine if I say: Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest Mr. Robert and Mr. John.
This x and y should be equivalent to some activities (like tense or clause) to make the original sentence legitimate. We can't say that ''I have found evidence to suggest pen (x) and paper (y)''. We should write the activities of 'pen and paper'. So, the complete sentence will be something like below.
I have found evidence to suggest pen is used to write something on the answer script and paper is used for making answer script.
In the above sentence, there should have a conjunction like THAT to animate the part ''I have found evidence to suggest''. So, the correct sentence will be:
I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script and paper is used for making answer script.
In the above sentence, I suggested two things simultaneously. So, if I break down the whole sentence into several parts, then the sentence will be like following.
I have found evidence to suggest THAT
1) pen is used to write something on the answer script
and
2) paper is used for making answer script.
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script.
2/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT paper is used for making answer script.
Now, if I write the sentence like below, then it'll be...
I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script and THAT paper is used for making answer script.
If I breakdown this sentence, then it'll be...
I have found evidence to suggest THAT
a) pen is used to write something on the answer script
and
b) THAT paper is used for making answer script.
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll NOT work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT pen is used to write something on the answer script.
--->OK
2/ I have found evidence to suggest THAT THAT paper is used for making answer script.
---->NOT OK
SAME thing is happened in the original sentence of Official Guide!
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal and that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Now, if I break down this sentence into several parts it'll be....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that
a) the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal
and
b) that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel
So, if I write the above sentence into separate parts, then it'll NOT work perfectly. Here are the separate parts of the above sentence:
1/ Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal.
----->OK
2/ Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest that that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
-----> NOT OK (doesn't make sense to me!)
Again,
if we break down the original sentence into several parts like below, then it'll be....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest
a) that the elephant is descended from an aquatic animal (X)
b) that its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel (Y)
The whole sentence is something like below....
Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest X and Y.
So, the above sentence is ''SENTENCE FRAGMENT''
Correct me if my understanding is wrong, please!
