Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 20:50 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 20:50
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   
User avatar
Avinash_R1
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2016
Last visit: 31 Jan 2019
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
22
 [3]
Given Kudos: 56
Posts: 21
Kudos: 22
 [3]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 29 Oct 2018, 10:07
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Prateek176


GMATNinja

Sir I am not clear with the explanation you provided for option B. Could you elaborate this a little more?

GMATNinja
Quote:
B. devastation and enslavement in the name of progress by which native peoples of the Western Hemisphere decimated
This one just doesn’t make any sense. The native peoples were decimated; the way (B) is written, it sounds like they decimated somebody else, but we don’t know who. And that doesn’t make sense. Eliminate (B).
Consider a silly example: "After working up a huge appetite on the ski slopes, Charlie decimated the buffet." In this example, some guy named Charlie decimated ("destroyed") the buffet, presumably by eating all of it. "Charlie" is the grammatical subject for the verb "decimated" -- and the poor buffet is the thing that is decimated.

(B) is actually structured the same way: "... native peoples of the Western Hemisphere decimated." "Native peoples" is the subject, and "decimated" is the verb. The problem is, the sentence never says what, exactly, the "native peoples" decimate. There is no object for the sentence. And logically, the native peoples themselves WERE decimated. They didn't "decimate" anything.

(In in case anybody is wondering, there are apparently two different versions of this question. My explanation was originally attached to a slightly different version of the question than the one that appears at the very beginning of this thread.)

I hope this helps!
Show more

sir,

it is not - devastation and enslavement in the name of progress by which native peoples of the Western Hemisphere decimated
rather devastation and enslavement in the name of progress by which native peoples of the Western Hemisphere have been decimated

in this case it is just written in passive voice. i am not finding any difference between B and E (except one in active voice and the other in passive voice).
is it that active voice to be preferred over passive voice if there are no other reason to eliminate

(or) the usage of article THE. in E, it specifies he has come to personify the devastation and enslavement that decimated native peoples - [more specific]
whereas, in B it is more of generic. [the specific nature is missing]

thanks
User avatar
US09
User avatar
Joined: 15 Oct 2017
Last visit: 06 Apr 2021
Posts: 247
Own Kudos:
302
 [1]
Given Kudos: 338
GMAT 1: 560 Q42 V25
GMAT 2: 570 Q43 V27
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V39
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V39
Posts: 247
Kudos: 302
 [1]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 31 Oct 2018, 22:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Quote:
B. devastation and enslavement in the name of progress by which native peoples of the Western Hemisphere decimated
This one just doesn’t make any sense. The native peoples were decimated; the way (B) is written, it sounds like they decimated somebody else, but we don’t know who. And that doesn’t make sense. Eliminate (B).
Show more
Consider a silly example: "After working up a huge appetite on the ski slopes, Charlie decimated the buffet." In this example, some guy named Charlie decimated ("destroyed") the buffet, presumably by eating all of it. "Charlie" is the grammatical subject for the verb "decimated" -- and the poor buffet is the thing that is decimated.

(B) is actually structured the same way: "... native peoples of the Western Hemisphere decimated." "Native peoples" is the subject, and "decimated" is the verb. The problem is, the sentence never says what, exactly, the "native peoples" decimate. There is no object for the sentence. And logically, the native peoples themselves WERE decimated. They didn't "decimate" anything.

(In in case anybody is wondering, there are apparently two different versions of this question. My explanation was originally attached to a slightly different version of the question than the one that appears at the very beginning of this thread.)

I hope this helps![/quote]



I have the same question, B has "have been" decimated. Also, more recently it has been observed that there is no preference for active over passive if the meaning of the sentence fits either choice. Can anyone please help? Why not B?
avatar
ovrup007
avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2018
Last visit: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 9
Given Kudos: 26
Posts: 9
Kudos: 0
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 22 Nov 2018, 21:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Experts,

Could you shed some light on the usage of "peoples"? I believe people has the same plural as well as singular form.

Thanks & Regards,
Abhirup
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
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 20 Jan 2019, 13:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ovrup007
Hi Experts,

Could you shed some light on the usage of "peoples"? I believe people has the same plural as well as singular form.

Thanks & Regards,
Abhirup
Show more
You're basically correct if we're talking about... well, actual people. "People" is just the plural of "person." But if we're talking about multiple ethnic groups or several nations of people, then the plural is "peoples". It's a weird bit of English. So it would be correct to talk about the various "Turkic peoples of the Asian steppe", for example.

And I would bet you a pair of Super Bowl tickets that you won't see the word "peoples" on your actual GMAT exam. So please don't lose any sleep over it.

I hope this helps a bit!
User avatar
Manat
User avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2018
Last visit: 22 Feb 2020
Posts: 121
Own Kudos:
72
Given Kudos: 79
Schools: DeGroote "22 (II) Molson '22 (A)
GMAT 1: 500 Q39 V21
Schools: DeGroote "22 (II) Molson '22 (A)
GMAT 1: 500 Q39 V21
Posts: 121
Kudos: 72
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 20 Jan 2019, 18:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja should which always have a comma before it?
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
 [4]
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
 [4]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 25 Jan 2019, 12:00
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Manat
GMATNinja should which always have a comma before it?
Show more
Generally speaking, when "which" is the subject of a modifying clause, it will follow a comma. For example, "Dana's toy robot, which was designed by evil scientists, is powered by a nugget of plutonium that she found in a broom closet in a U.S. Army base."

However, if "which" is the object of a prepositional phrase, it won't follow a comma. The weapon in which Dana has placed all of her faith is a toy robot that shoots radioactive lasers out of its head." (In other news, maybe the toy robot industry needs some stronger safety regulations?)

I hope that helps!
avatar
jelata
avatar
Joined: 03 Sep 2018
Last visit: 26 Apr 2019
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 10 Feb 2019, 05:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For a question such as this one, how do we know whether "that" is acting as a modifier to describe "enslavement" alone or "devastation and enslavement". I marked A because I thought that "that" jumps over the prepositional phrase to modify enslavement alone, and choice E is wrong because "the devastation and enslavement" seems to be a singular entity.

Please help. Thank you
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
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 02 Apr 2019, 01:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jelata
For a question such as this one, how do we know whether "that" is acting as a modifier to describe "enslavement" alone or "devastation and enslavement". I marked A because I thought that "that" jumps over the prepositional phrase to modify enslavement alone, and choice E is wrong because "the devastation and enslavement" seems to be a singular entity.

Please help. Thank you
Show more
Good question! Because the GMAT cannot ask us to read minds, we have to use context clues and logic to guide us.

Take another look at (E):

Quote:
…the devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that have decimated the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.
Show more

While we can't know what the author intended, we can see that the verb "have" is plural, and so the phrase beginning with "that" must modify a plural noun. The only possibility here is the compound noun phrase, "the devastation and enslavement"; otherwise, we’d have a subject-verb agreement problem otherwise, since “… enslavement that have decimated" doesn’t work at all.

Contrast this with (A):
Quote:
…devastation and enslavement in the name of progress that has decimated native peoples of the Western Hemisphere.
Show more
Now "has" is singular, meaning we need “that” to modify a singular noun. So at the very least, the phrase “that has decimated native peoples” can’t modify “devastation and enslavement”, since that pair of nouns would require a plural verb.

So what are our options for singular nouns? The closest preceding singular noun is "progress." But it doesn't make any sense to write that "progress" decimated peoples.

I suppose you could argue that “that has decimated native peoples” modifies only “enslavement.” But that requires a huge logical contortion: in order for "that" to refer only to "enslavement," we'd have to convince ourselves that "that" somehow jumps over "progress" and then refers to only one of two items in a compound noun construction (“devastation and enslavement”). That’s pretty far-fetched.

If finding an antecedent requires that much logical contortion, it's a good bet that we're over-complicating things -- we want the correct answer to be as clear as possible.

The simplest interpretation of (A) is illogical, and so (E) is clearly better.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
prags1989
User avatar
Joined: 06 Mar 2018
Last visit: 29 Jul 2024
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
11
Given Kudos: 148
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V27
GRE 1: Q160 V150
GPA: 2.7
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V27
GRE 1: Q160 V150
Posts: 53
Kudos: 11
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 06 Jun 2019, 06:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I understood that we are using HAVE for devastation and enslavement.

but it is mentioned THAT, we can use has because of THAT.

Can you help me to understand here Rakesh1987
User avatar
Rakesh1987
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 17 Jul 2018
Last visit: 31 Dec 2024
Posts: 66
Own Kudos:
248
 [1]
Given Kudos: 100
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Leadership
Schools: Stern '23 (M$)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V44
GPA: 4
Schools: Stern '23 (M$)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V44
Posts: 66
Kudos: 248
 [1]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 06 Jun 2019, 06:55
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
prags1989
I understood that we are using HAVE for devastation and enslavement.

but it is mentioned THAT, we can use has because of THAT.

Can you help me to understand here Rakesh1987
Show more

devastation and enslavement are two nouns / subjects combined with "and" and hence demand plural verb. "That" is a relative pronoun which is used here to refer to the compound subject "devastation and enslavement" and hence will require a plural verb have and not singular verb has. Note: that and which are relative pronouns and we have to see their antecedents to determine number.

I hope it clears your doubt. :cool:
User avatar
Diwabag
User avatar
Joined: 06 Mar 2019
Last visit: 13 Jan 2021
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
14
Given Kudos: 85
Schools: IMD '21
Schools: IMD '21
Posts: 28
Kudos: 14
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 08 Jun 2019, 20:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In the first post, choice B has the present perfect "HAVE BEEN" before "decimated", in the discussions and GMAT Ninja's webinar, the verb is in simple past "decimated".

Im assuming this is a typo in the first post? If yes, maybe the moderator should edit it to prevent other people (like me hehe) from being confused?

Thanks!
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
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 09 Jun 2019, 06:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Diwabag
In the first post, choice B has the present perfect "HAVE BEEN" before "decimated", in the discussions and GMAT Ninja's webinar, the verb is in simple past "decimated".

Im assuming this is a typo in the first post? If yes, maybe the moderator should edit it to prevent other people (like me hehe) from being confused?

Thanks!
Show more
Diwabag, I'm not sure that it's a typo, exactly. As far as I know, the version that's in the original post actually appeared somewhere -- maybe in a previous version of the GMATPrep software? This is not unusual: sometimes the GMAT publishes multiple versions of the same question, for some reason.

Bunuel, do you think it's better to change the original post to the version that's currently in the GMATPrep software? There's just a slight difference in the answer choices. I trust your judgment in all things related to forum hygiene. :)
User avatar
lakshya14
User avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2019
Last visit: 27 Jul 2022
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
45
Given Kudos: 529
Posts: 360
Kudos: 45
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 30 Apr 2020, 06:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How to choose between "Christopher Columbus" and "devastation" and "enslavement"?
I thought Christopher Columbus as being the subject, as at the end of the day, it as was Columbus who did the "devastation and "enslavement"
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
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 30 Apr 2020, 07:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
lakshya14
it as was Columbus who did the "devastation and "enslavement"
Show more
Yes and that "devastation and enslavement" have decimated the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere

So, "devastation and enslavement" is the subject.
User avatar
DmitryFarber
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,020
Own Kudos:
8,563
 [2]
Given Kudos: 57
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,020
Kudos: 8,563
 [2]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 30 Apr 2020, 15:28
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
lakshya14 It depends on what you mean by "the subject." Columbus is the main subject of the sentence, simply because he's the first noun in the sentence that isn't part of a modifier or dependent clause. After the "for many historians" modifier, we have a noun, so that noun (Columbus) has to be the subject. But then Columbus gets a verb:

Columbus HAS come to personify the devastation and enslavement.

From there, we could continue with Columbus as the subject if we linked in another verb with AND. However, what we get instead is a noun modifier introduced by THAT. Any time we follow a noun with THAT, we are modifying the noun. So we can know for sure that "that have decimated" refers to devastation and enslavement.
User avatar
LSwetha
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2018
Last visit: 24 Dec 2020
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
8
Given Kudos: 31
Posts: 14
Kudos: 8
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 26 Jul 2020, 09:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Hi sir,

I watched your video on this. I really want to know why 'devastation and enslavement' cant be considered as a single unit and therefore 'has' in option A is correct.

Reason for considering 'devastation and enslavement' as a single unit :.

Columbus (one person) has come to personify 'devastation and enslavement' (one unit) has decimated people. - i understand why it ideally will not be considered as a single unit, but from meaning perspective, why not. Columbus is compared to A PAIR of things. It may not be right/sounds weird but why is it wtong if we look at it from a 'pair of nouns' perspective.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN SIR.

Regards,
L.SWETHA

Posted from my mobile device
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]
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 27 Aug 2020, 07:29
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
LSwetha
GMATNinja
Hi sir,

I watched your video on this. I really want to know why 'devastation and enslavement' cant be considered as a single unit and therefore 'has' in option A is correct.

Reason for considering 'devastation and enslavement' as a single unit :.

Columbus (one person) has come to personify 'devastation and enslavement' (one unit) has decimated people. - i understand why it ideally will not be considered as a single unit, but from meaning perspective, why not. Columbus is compared to A PAIR of things. It may not be right/sounds weird but why is it wtong if we look at it from a 'pair of nouns' perspective.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN SIR.

Regards,
L.SWETHA

Posted from my mobile device
Show more
Whenever you see the construction "X and Y," you're generally talking about a plural entity, unless both X and Y are part of a single unit. For example:

    Tim and his son are planning to attend the Lionel Ritchie concert, where they will be the only audience members in the mosh pit.

Here, "Tim and his son" are clearly different people, and so the plural "are" is called for.

But I could also write,

    Earth, Wind, and Fire is the greatest band that has ever existed, and Lionel Ritchie was lucky to be a part of it.

Now, "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is one band, and because it's a single entity, requires the singular verb "is."

In this question, "devastation and enslavement" are two different phenomena. An invading army might devastate a village. It might enslave its inhabitants. Both actions are terrible. But they're not the same, so this construction should be treated as a plural, rather than as a singular entity.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,290
Own Kudos:
937
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,290
Kudos: 937
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 28 Aug 2020, 00:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
LSwetha
GMATNinja
Hi sir,

I watched your video on this. I really want to know why 'devastation and enslavement' cant be considered as a single unit and therefore 'has' in option A is correct.

Reason for considering 'devastation and enslavement' as a single unit :.

Columbus (one person) has come to personify 'devastation and enslavement' (one unit) has decimated people. - i understand why it ideally will not be considered as a single unit, but from meaning perspective, why not. Columbus is compared to A PAIR of things. It may not be right/sounds weird but why is it wtong if we look at it from a 'pair of nouns' perspective.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN SIR.

Regards,
L.SWETHA

Posted from my mobile device
Whenever you see the construction "X and Y," you're generally talking about a plural entity, unless both X and Y are part of a single unit. For example:

    Tim and his son are planning to attend the Lionel Ritchie concert, where they will be the only audience members in the mosh pit.

Here, "Tim and his son" are clearly different people, and so the plural "are" is called for.

But I could also write,

    Earth, Wind, and Fire is the greatest band that has ever existed, and Lionel Ritchie was lucky to be a part of it.

Now, "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is one band, and because it's a single entity, requires the singular verb "is."

In this question, "devastation and enslavement" are two different phenomena. An invading army might devastate a village. It might enslave its inhabitants. Both actions are terrible. But they're not the same, so this construction should be treated as a plural, rather than as a singular entity.

I hope that helps!
Show more


Hi

Adding a question on this

Quote:
And if anybody is still curious about the article "the" at the beginning of (E): I don't think it's a big deal, but adding "the" helps clarify that Columbus personifies the specific devastation and enslavement that decimated the native peoples, rather than devastation and enslavement in general. But again: that's not a major issue, and not something that should worry you too much
Show more

Should n't 'the' be repeated to present them as different entities rather than one?

E. the devastation and enslavement xxx - why this is not a single entity?
OR
the devastation and THE enslavement xxx - this should be plural entity?

please clarify.


thanks!

GMATNinja EMPOWERgmatVerbal
User avatar
EMPOWERgmatVerbal
User avatar
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Last visit: 17 Feb 2025
Posts: 1,694
Own Kudos:
15,175
Given Kudos: 766
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,694
Kudos: 15,175
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 28 Aug 2020, 15:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imSKR
GMATNinja
LSwetha
GMATNinja
Hi sir,

I watched your video on this. I really want to know why 'devastation and enslavement' cant be considered as a single unit and therefore 'has' in option A is correct.

Reason for considering 'devastation and enslavement' as a single unit :.

Columbus (one person) has come to personify 'devastation and enslavement' (one unit) has decimated people. - i understand why it ideally will not be considered as a single unit, but from meaning perspective, why not. Columbus is compared to A PAIR of things. It may not be right/sounds weird but why is it wtong if we look at it from a 'pair of nouns' perspective.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN SIR.

Regards,
L.SWETHA

Posted from my mobile device
Whenever you see the construction "X and Y," you're generally talking about a plural entity, unless both X and Y are part of a single unit. For example:

    Tim and his son are planning to attend the Lionel Ritchie concert, where they will be the only audience members in the mosh pit.

Here, "Tim and his son" are clearly different people, and so the plural "are" is called for.

But I could also write,

    Earth, Wind, and Fire is the greatest band that has ever existed, and Lionel Ritchie was lucky to be a part of it.

Now, "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is one band, and because it's a single entity, requires the singular verb "is."

In this question, "devastation and enslavement" are two different phenomena. An invading army might devastate a village. It might enslave its inhabitants. Both actions are terrible. But they're not the same, so this construction should be treated as a plural, rather than as a singular entity.

I hope that helps!


Hi

Adding a question on this

Quote:
And if anybody is still curious about the article "the" at the beginning of (E): I don't think it's a big deal, but adding "the" helps clarify that Columbus personifies the specific devastation and enslavement that decimated the native peoples, rather than devastation and enslavement in general. But again: that's not a major issue, and not something that should worry you too much

Should n't 'the' be repeated to present them as different entities rather than one?

E. the devastation and enslavement xxx - why this is not a single entity?
OR
the devastation and THE enslavement xxx - this should be plural entity?

please clarify.


thanks!

GMATNinja EMPOWERgmatVerbal
Show more

Hi imSKR!

In the example GMATNinja gave you, the band "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is considered a collective noun, and therefore doesn't follow the same standards as other plural noun groupings. Band names and titles often fall under collective nouns, and are treated as singular - even if they LOOK plural.

In the case of the sentence we're looking at here, "devastation and enslavement" are two different acts being paired up, and are plural. Since this phrase doesn't fall under the collective noun rule, it's always plural - no matter how many "the's" you add in.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,290
Own Kudos:
937
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,290
Kudos: 937
For many revisionist historians, Christopher Columbus has come to 28 Aug 2020, 23:31
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
EMPOWERgmatVerbal
imSKR
GMATNinja
LSwetha
GMATNinja
Hi sir,

I watched your video on this. I really want to know why 'devastation and enslavement' cant be considered as a single unit and therefore 'has' in option A is correct.

Reason for considering 'devastation and enslavement' as a single unit :.

Columbus (one person) has come to personify 'devastation and enslavement' (one unit) has decimated people. - i understand why it ideally will not be considered as a single unit, but from meaning perspective, why not. Columbus is compared to A PAIR of things. It may not be right/sounds weird but why is it wtong if we look at it from a 'pair of nouns' perspective.

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN SIR.

Regards,
L.SWETHA

Posted from my mobile device
Whenever you see the construction "X and Y," you're generally talking about a plural entity, unless both X and Y are part of a single unit. For example:

    Tim and his son are planning to attend the Lionel Ritchie concert, where they will be the only audience members in the mosh pit.

Here, "Tim and his son" are clearly different people, and so the plural "are" is called for.

But I could also write,

    Earth, Wind, and Fire is the greatest band that has ever existed, and Lionel Ritchie was lucky to be a part of it.

Now, "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is one band, and because it's a single entity, requires the singular verb "is."

In this question, "devastation and enslavement" are two different phenomena. An invading army might devastate a village. It might enslave its inhabitants. Both actions are terrible. But they're not the same, so this construction should be treated as a plural, rather than as a singular entity.

I hope that helps!


Hi

Adding a question on this

Quote:
And if anybody is still curious about the article "the" at the beginning of (E): I don't think it's a big deal, but adding "the" helps clarify that Columbus personifies the specific devastation and enslavement that decimated the native peoples, rather than devastation and enslavement in general. But again: that's not a major issue, and not something that should worry you too much

Should n't 'the' be repeated to present them as different entities rather than one?

E. the devastation and enslavement xxx - why this is not a single entity?
OR
the devastation and THE enslavement xxx - this should be plural entity?

please clarify.


thanks!

GMATNinja EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Hi imSKR!

In the example GMATNinja gave you, the band "Earth, Wind, and Fire" is considered a collective noun, and therefore doesn't follow the same standards as other plural noun groupings. Band names and titles often fall under collective nouns, and are treated as singular - even if they LOOK plural.

In the case of the sentence we're looking at here, "devastation and enslavement" are two different acts being paired up, and are plural. Since this phrase doesn't fall under the collective noun rule, it's always plural - no matter how many "the's" you add in.

I hope that helps!
Show more

SO it means: all below are plural and correct without any matter with position with 'the' ( special collecting nouns)
devastation and enslavement" ARE
the devastation and enslavement" ARE
the devastation and the enslavement" ARE
devastation and the enslavement" ARE


If as below: ( standard collective nouns)
The boy and girl - would it be singular or plural in this case?
Boy and the girl - would it be singular or plural in this case?
The boy and the girl - ARE
Boy and girl -ARE

please clarify
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts