Quote:
Like the present, the past is constantly revised as a result of alterations to written records and reinterpretations of them.
(A) Like the present, the past is constantly revised as a result of alterations to written records and reinterpretations of them
(B) Just as the present is changing, so too is the past constantly revised due to alterations and reinterpretations of written records
(C) Just like the constantly changing present, the past is being revised as a result of alterations to written records and reinterpretations of those records
(D) As the present changes, the past is constantly revised due to alterations and reinterpretations of written records
(E) Just as the present is constantly changing, the past is constantly being revised as a result of alterations to and reinterpretations of written records
A full-sentence underline, even a shorter sentence, needs to be handled with care. It is really important to ask yourself what the sentence seems to be conveying. There are a couple other issues to discuss, so how about we jump in?
Consideration #1: the comparisonsI am not going to go with my usual explanation of running through splits when the sentence immediately confronts us with different comparisons. We have to evaluate each one on its own merits.
Quote:
(A) Like the present, the past
It is appropriate to
like in noun-to-noun comparisons, so this one checks out.
Quote:
(B) Just as the present is changing, so too is the past constantly revised
Now, the comparison has shifted to actions,
is changing and
is… revised.
As correctly compares the two.
Quote:
(C) Just like the constantly changing present, the past is being revised
This one masquerades as a legitimate noun-to-noun comparison between present and past, but its parallel elements are off.
Changing is used as an adjective ahead of what it modifies, while the part about the past hides behind
is being, an action. You also have to be careful with
Just like. We typically see such usage when two things are indistinguishable:
You look just like her. She could be your twin. On its own,
like allows more leeway, and it would probably be more fitting here. This one makes me the most uncomfortable so far, and I would certainly mark it as a doubt.
Quote:
(D) As the present changes, the past is constantly revised
This comparison is confusing, since it is not entirely clear whether a comparison is intended at all. The first part could be interpreted in a manner similar to
As the clock ticks… If the sentence does aim to present a comparison, that comparison should be clear; if not, then why would we need that prefatory clause? We would expect the sentence to start with the past. If (C) made me uncomfortable, this one makes me feel more confident… in my ability to eliminate, that is.
Quote:
(E) Just as the present is constantly changing, the past is constantly being revised
The comparison has shifted back to the actions, and the parallelism could not be any tighter—
the present is constantly changing and
the past is constantly being revised. This is the only option that has repeated
constantly, and it is fitting because the two types of change are not exactly the same. The present moment changes on its own, while revising the past seems to involve manipulation of some sort. Also, do not write off an answer choice just because it uses
being, even when the word appears in verb form. If the stress is on
constantly, you have to think of how that adverb may interact with the different types of verbs
to change and
to revise:
a)
the present is constantly being changed and
the past is constantly being revisedThe comparison is perfectly parallel, but now the present appears to be changed with intent, and I am unsure about the notion in the absence of an agent who would carry out such manipulation.
b)
the present is constantly changing and
the past is constantly revisedThis would also work, but it is not what we see on the screen. If you are uncomfortable with
being, think of a simpler sentence without a comparison. The sentence need not be identical in structure, just similar enough to make the illustration meaningful.
At present, the mansion is dilapidated and is being demolished later this week.So far, I would probably focus on (A), (B), and (E) as contenders and look for ways to tease them apart.
Consideration #2: as a result of versus
due toDue to is commonly used anywhere an explanation appears, even in reputable print sources. However, when you see it on the GMAT™ in this context, you want to see it explain a noun, rather than an action. In all five iterations of the sentence, the explanation is building off of the word
revised. Something is
revised, an action, as a result of or because of certain conditions. You could say that
a revision, a noun, was due to something, but
due to does not fit the sentence in question.
Eliminate answer choices (B) and (D).
Consideration #3: the endingsAs much as possible, you want to see if you can group different answer choices so that you can kill two birds with one stone. Pick up the sentence with
alterations, and notice that answer choices (B) and (D) are identical in this regard.
Quote:
(A) alterations to written records and reinterpretations of them
(B)/(D) alterations and reinterpretations of written records
(C) alterations to written records and reinterpretations of those records
(E) alterations to and reinterpretations of written records
Answer choices (B) and (D) are the most concise, and the preposition
of needs to be understood to apply to
alterations after the fact, because
alterations cannot operate on its own. Is it acceptable to say
alterations of? In a word, yes. I often consult and cite the Cambridge Dictionary in my posts when someone is asking about a finer grammatical point. Here are
a few sample sentences under alteration:
Quote:
- Several police officers are being questioned about the alteration of the documents.
- Some alterations to our original plans might be necessary.
Perhaps because I have heard the word used in reference to the clothing industry, in which alterations are made
to a garment, I prefer
to, but I cannot dispute that
of is functional.
Answer choices (A) and (C) are nearly identical, the latter making explicit reference to the
records that must serve as the referent of
them in the original sentence. Such repetition seems unnecessary in a short description. To be honest, I would rather go with the less comfortable parallelism of (B) and (D).
Answer choice (E) places
written records at the end, and it is also the only option to mix prepositions:
alterations to and
reinterpretations of. If you follow parallelism too closely, you do not have a chance of evaluating this one fairly. On their own, the two descriptions undoubtedly work, so are mismatched prepositions permissible? The answer is yes, they are. Take a look at
this question from several editions of the
OG if you do not believe me. (
Spoiler alert.) The end of the sentence in the correct answer reads,
centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.
In short, I would disfavor the reference to or repetition of
written records in (A) and (C).
Count up the marks against each answer choice after our three considerations:
(A)
√√X(B)
√X√(C)
X√X(D)
XX√(E)
√√√The winner is (E), the single option without a mark or doubt against it. I suspect this will prove to be one of the harder, perhaps more contentious, questions in the competition. But if you look at each consideration objectively, you should end up in agreement that (E) is the best option of the five.
With half the competition behind you, you can regroup then redouble your efforts for round two. Good luck to all competitors.
- Andrew
close
15 Jul 2022, 08:00
66%
(01:41)
wrong 
