Diets including more fruits, vegetables, fiber, and less red, processe

Hi,
Could anyone explain why is option E not a correct choice?

As mikemcgarry has already said, we have 2 lists. And we have to put "and" in the end of each of them (that is the rule). And to put "and" between them.
In option E we do not have "and" in the end of the first list.

2jokschmer: Option D is the first one out because it has 2 predicates verbs: "includes" and "is linked" - it can't be.

Dear jokschmer,

I'm happy to respond. Choice (B) train wreck incorrect. The grammar in (B) is purely atrocious.

Let's get rid of the long list to see the relationship of the verb:
A diet includes more fruits is linked to lower colorectal cancer risk.
There are two full verbs, each of which seems to want to use "a diet" as the subject. If these two are meant to be in parallel, they would need a conjunction between them, such as "and," but putting them in parallel would change the meaning of the sentence. It's unclear what their relationship should be.

Does this make sense?
Mike

Thanks for your help once again Mike.

Dear Mike,

I have quick question about choice D. Should not be a 'comma' to separate the 2 lists as follows:

Diets that include more fruits, vegetables, and fiber[b], and less red and processed meat are

Thanks

Dear Mo2men,

I'm happy to respond. How are you, my friend?

The short answer is no. No comma needed. This is tricky to understand.

You see, what we have here are nested parallelism, that is, parallelism within parallelism.

Here's the outer structure:
Diets that include more X and less Y are . . .
That's the outer parallelism, and clearly, with just two elements, we don't need a comma separating them.

Now, each element dropped into slots X and Y contain an element of parallelism.
X = fruits, vegetables, and fiber ==> contains correct parallelism
Y = red and processed meat ==> contains correct parallelism

Now, we will drop these expressions for X & Y, exactly as they are, with their correct parallelism, into the outer structure, which is also correct, and other than straight substitution, we won't change a thing:
Diets that include more fruits, vegetables, and fiber and less red and processed meat are . . .
That's (D).

Does this make sense?

Take care, my friend. Have a wonderful weekend.
Mike

Brill explanation Mike-

Basically we need another and in order to separate the implication of "more." For example the difference between

This house has less proximity and less neighboring houses.

This house has less proximity and fewer neighboring houses.

What you're basically saying is that we need another otherwise we are implying

"...[more] less red meat" - clearly illogical

more A, B, and C and less D and E

only one answer follows this correct format

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

This Sentence Construction problem requires you to consider the proper way to link the items in the two series that describe "diets" or "a diet." The diet being described has more of some things and less of others.

More: fruits, vegetables, and fiber

Less: red and processed meat

Choices A, C, and E each fail to properly end the "more" list with an "and" before "fiber." By saying "more fruits, vegetables, fiber, and less red..." the sentence applies the modifier "more" to all of those items, meaning that the final term is "more less red and process meat" which is nonsensical. Therefore A, C, and E are incorrect.

Choice B is guilty of a different error. The other choices all use the lists of more/less to describe a particular type of diet (A diet THAT includes...). But choice B omits the word "that" and in doing so makes that initial portion about "more" an independent clause. The resulting sentence then says two completely separate and unrelated things: A diet includes more of these features, and (separately) less red and processed meat is linked to lower cancer risk. This pairing of separate ideas in one sentence forms an illogical thought (who would ever write that sentence?!) so choice B is incorrect.

Choice D, which properly separates and links the two lists (A diet that includes more of these things and less of those...), is correct.

MentorTutoring

I have a small doubt

"That" when acting as a pronoun can take only singular antecedent and when acting as a modifier it can take any one- singular or plural

And in this ques, D uses "that" to modify "diets"

Is it correct?

I do not understand the reason for your doubt, GDT. Yes, that here is describing diets, no different from saying that monkeys that develop poor social skills in youth tend to show more aggression in adulthood. In either sentence, you would not replace that with the plural noun preceding it and have a comprehensible sentence without changing the structure: We are not saying in (D) that all diets such and such, just that specific diets are linked to lower risks of developing a certain disease.

- Andrew

how are fiber and fruits/vegetables correct parallelism?
isn't fiber something we get off of fruits?

is this right parallelism : I like juices and nutrients?

Hello, shivambangia. Yes, fruits and vegetables contain fiber, but they are not the only foods that do. Moreover, fruits and vegetables contain many vitamins and minerals. We do not know why the sentence makes mention of fruits and vegetables, but a diet can be said to consist of high-fiber foods, high-nutrient foods, low-calorie foods, low-carbohydrate foods, and so on. Thus, diets that include more fiber (a type of carbohydrate), even mentioned alongside fruits and vegetables (actual foods), is fine. This is just a quirk of the language, nothing more. (Your sample sentence would also work because you can like just about anything. Replace like with drink or some more restrictive verb, and you would probably need to tweak it.) One bit of advice: unless it is an official question, do not worry too much about the phrasing. As the saying goes, you can cross that bridge when you get to it.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

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.