England was the birth place for laws restricting women from working du

Question

England was the birth place for laws restricting women from working during nights, restrictions based on the idea that women  were not only weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation compared to men, but also  lacked competence to make valid choices.

A) were not only weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation compared to men, but also
B) not only were weaker, more vulnerable to exploitation than men, but also women
C) not only were weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation than men, but also
D) not only were weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation than men, but also they
E) not only were weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation by men, but also

pd96 · Answer

Please help me in identifying the error for this one, and why it would be E

starklogan456 · Answer

The OA seems incorrect. "Women not only were weaker...... than men" in option C makes more sense than "weaker .... by men" in E

Posted from my mobile device

pd96 · Answer

Were should precede not only imo

pankti2810 · Answer

Yes, even I am of the same opinion. IMO the answer should be A.

Aviral1995 · Answer

Yes answer should be C. Please see experts  VeritasKarishma   GMATNinja   egmat

CuriosStud · Answer

Well Choices A to D can be eliminated on the basis of comparison issues, Women were more vulnerable to exploitation's than men. Even in choice A, women were more vulnerable to exploitation compared to men can mean that 
they were more vulnerable to men than exploitation or women were more vulnerable than men were to exploitation's

Fahad222 · Answer

I really did not get it, option E changes the meaning of the sentence. 
The first four options were making a comparison between men and women with regards to exploitation. 
Option E portrays men as aggressors. 
Is there something which I missed??

Posted from my mobile device

CuriosStud · Answer

fahad  while it does change the meaning, Unlike to what we see mostly on GMAT, but the comparison error is much more evident. A logical confusion or flaw that GMAT won't like. While in E, The meaning is much more clearer

nehasomani33 · Answer

@genris - Sir, would you be able to help me understand the reason behind choosing option E. 
IMO, Option C seems better than E.

Posted from my mobile device

generis · Answer

nehasomani33 , I can understand why option C seems better than option E, but option E is the best of the five answers. This question is hard. Please also see my post immediately below this one for an analysis of all the options. I'm trying to think as the writers of this question would think. What are they testing? Examine the difference between C and E. The options C) ... women not only were weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation than men, but also lacked competence to make valid choi E) ... women not only were weaker and more vulnerable to exploitation by men, but also lacked competence to make valid choices. So C uses "more vulnerable to exploitation than men," while E uses "more vulnerable to exploitation by men." The issue is the use of the explicit comparison "than men." Both C and E use women were weaker than men ]. Option E is is better than option C because the comparison in C contains the possibility of ambiguity. (Think as the question writers think. What are they testing?) In C, the comparison could mean two things. -- "To be" verbs are generally implied in comparisons. We can usually drop the "were" in "women were more vulnerable to exploitation than men were ." -- GMAC has been inconsistent on this issue a couple of times. The correct answer has included the second "were" on occasion. I do not recall whether GMAC has ever tested the inclusion directly as is done in this question. -- But we must choose the option with the least possibility of ambiguity. -- It's clear what C is supposed to mean, but the words can be interpreted to mean two things. That situation is rarely okay on the GMAT. In E, although the structure is very awkward and "were weaker" is not coupled with "than men ," it is still the better sentence. Ambiguity is an absolute deal breaker on the GMAT. Although the possibility of ambiguity is pretty slim in C, still, that possibility does not exist in E. This question writer obviously believes that in C, the possibility of ambiguity exists. Possible ambiguity because of "than" is the only plausible decision point between C and E. I will use a similar structure: Men are more interested in soccer than women. This comparison is ambiguous. Men like soccer more than men like women ? OR Men like soccer more than women like soccer? Similarly in option C, this question writer sees: Women are more vulnerable to exploitation than women are vulnerable to men? OR Women are more vulnerable to exploitation than men are vulnerable to exploitation? Option E is a bit weird, I grant you that much. I'm not a fan of "women were weaker" without a "than men," in C and E because it sends mixed messages. (The mixed message, IMO: Comparisons do not have to be explicit if the compared thing is obvious; comparisons cannot risk even a little ambiguity.) Including an incomplete comparison in a strict sense (weaker than whom?) doesn't seem that much different from having a comparison that involves ellipsis of the to be verb were ]. Both "women were weaker " and "women were more vulnerable to exploitation than men " are often allowed on the GMAT. But both C and E have the unstated comparison. Only C contains the possibility of ambiguity in the comparison. Choose E because you risk no ambiguity. This sort of comparison really does not belong in the structure presented by Not only X but also Y . These questions are very hard to write, though, so I'm somewhat sympathetic. See my post below, and if you have further questions, tag me. I am happy to try to help. (P.S. you've gotta spell my username right, though, or I don't get notice of the tag.

)

generis · Answer

Ignore everything before that . And ignore the word that , too. • Quick POE Split #1 : Options A, B, and D are not parallel. A) WERE + NOT ONLY + X BUT ALSO + LACKED + Y B) WOMEN + NOT ONLY + VERB BUT ALSO + WOMEN + VERB D) WOMEN + NOT ONLY + VERB BUT ALSO + WOMEN + VERB Not parallel. Eliminate A, B, and D Split #2: C contains a slight possibility of ambiguity . . . women . . . were more vulnerable to exploitation than men → were women more vulnerable to exploitation or to men? → who was more vulnerable to exploitation: women or men? (C) contains possible ambiguity that (E) does not. Eliminate C. The answer is E OVERVIEW: THE ISSUES • COMPARISONS: THAN. Ambiguous? This question is hard because a tiny detail separates C from E—and GMAC usually tolerates the possible problem with C. So (1) remember that this question is not official, and (2) try to think as the question writers thought. • In a strict sense, the comparison in B, C, and D could be ambiguous. I'll use the same example from my post above. Men like soccer more than women. Men like soccer more than men like women ? OR Men like soccer more than women like soccer? In option B, below, I spell out the similarly possible ambiguity in options B, C, and D. • Parallelism and the idiom Not only X but also Y One way to narrow the options down to C and E is to find parallelism errors in A, B, and D. IDIOM: NOT ONLY X BUT ALSO Y - once inside, twice outside -- X and Y must be parallel -- PLACEMENT*: a verb, noun, preposition, or other "crucial" word must be placed -- once outside the "Not only X but Y" structure, or -- twice inside that structure How do we tell whether the words at issue are inside or outside the structure? Find not only in the sentence. That phrase marks the beginning of parallel structure. The "root phrase" precedes not only , The || marks indicate where the idiom/structure begins and ends. (This structure, by the way, is called a coordinating conjunction.) Correct : Dancers are || not only artists but also athletes.|| ( are is once outside)

Correct : Dancers || not only are artists but also are athletes.|| ( are is twice inside)

Wrong : Dancers are || not only artists but also are athletes.|| ( are is once outside, once inside)

Wrong : Dancers || not only are artists but also athletes.|| ( are is only once inside)

• So the three guiding principles are: (1) Than signals comparison that must be clear and logical. (2) In the idiomatic structure, X and Y must be parallel. Look at the words before and after not only and but also (3) one way to check parallelism: the word at issue must be placed once outside or twice inside the structure • compared to men is redundant. Weaker and more vulnerable are comparison words. GMAC really dislikes "compared to" and a comparison word (e.g. weaker) in the same sentence. • the verbs are parallel ( were and lacked , simple past tense) but are placed incorrectly -- Wrong : women were || not only X, but also lacked Y || once outside, once inside Or track the words that flank not only and but also as I did in the quick POE above. The verb lacked immediately follows but also . The verb were must follow not only. But in option A the verb were comes before not only, where the other verb comes after but also. Not parallel. Eliminate A • this comparison has the potential to be ambiguous. Does it mean: -- women were more vulnerable to exploitation than women were vulnerable to men? OR -- women were more vulnerable to exploitation than men were vulnerable to exploitation? • missing the word AND -- that highlighted comma should be the word AND • Not only X but also Y: not parallel -- women violates parallelism. The word women is once outside and once inside the structure.

In other words, now the noun/subject is improperly placed. women || not only were X, but also women lacked Y || ( once outside, once inside )

Same idea as once outside, twice inside— check flanking words, as I did above in the quick POE. Women comes before not only but comes after but also . Not parallel. Eliminate B. • This option correctly places the verbs were and lacked. The parallel verbs are twice inside . WOMEN: NOT ONLY + were + X BUT ALSO + lacked + Y • BUT C contains the same comparison issue as that in B. Possible ambiguity. Eliminate C. • same comparison error as that in B. Possible ambiguity. • same parallelism error (once outside, once inside) as B —except (C) misuses they rather than women . • the subject is incorrectly placed once outside (women) and once inside (they) the structure.

-- Flanking words? Women comes before not only but they comes after but also . Not parallel. Eliminate D. • By POE, option E is the answer. • both verbs were and lacked are inside the parallelism markers (Women not only WERE X, but also LACKED Y • What about "women were weaker"? Weaker than whom? -- the issue is not a decision point. Both C and E (the two best choices) contain the words -- if the comparative noun is obvious, GMAC allows its omission (weaker than men . • this option is the best of five. Mark it and move on. This question contains good examples of parallel and not-parallel constructions of the idiom Not only X but also Y . I would learn how to maintain parallelism when using this idiom; it is in the top-ten most frequently tested idioms.** Option C gets the verb parallelism correct but the comparison might be ambiguous Choose the option with no possibility of ambiguity. That answer is E. Hope that helps. Fahad222 and others: *Option A does not determine intended meaning. I realize that this statement is contrary to what some people are taught. The three experts below collectively possess more than forty years' of experience teaching the GMAT. They, too, say that there is nothing special about option A. GMATNinja , HERE, Dmitry Farber , here, and Ron Purewal , HERE. Option A usually does tell us the intended meaning, but that fact comes from our ability to determine intended meaning from the prompt, whose underlined portion, verbatim, is option A. Option A may happen to fit grammatically and rhetorically 20% of the time, but that fact does not mean that option A is the originally intended meaning. If need be, we should use all five options to determine meaning. **I wrote about how to handle Not only X but also Y and parallelism in this post, here . The analysis is a bit more in depth than what you see here, and the question is good practice. I see a lot of understandable confusion about how to ensure that this idiom is parallel. You can see my other post and cement your understanding of parallelism issues in "not only . . . but also . . ."

nehasomani33 · Answer

generis  - Thanks for the detailed explanation. This is really helpful!

Apology for mentioning your name incorrectly.

generis · Answer

nehasomani33  - glad I could help! (Please, do not worry about the name thing. I didn't figure out how to tag properly for months!)

KarishmaB · Answer

In option (E), think of the items as a list
... women were 
- weaker 
- more vulnerable to exploitation by men (women are more vulnerable to exploitation by men. Men are less vulnerable to exploitation by men)
It is obvious that the comparison is with men so it needn't be specified.

As for (C), I don't see any problem in that either since the use of comparative "weaker" and "more vulnerable" for women implies compared with men so it is a logical comparison. But just to ensure there is no ambiguity, it may be better to stick to (E).

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

England was the birth place for laws restricting women from working du

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards