Dear Mike,

I have some confusion about role mentioned above and the following:

In her birthday party, Alison served cakes and drinks

Is the above construction acceptable in GMAT? does 'her party' refer to Alison's party' correctly?

Thanks in advance

Thanks Mike.
I do share the curiosity when it is written in such a style.

(C) Zhuangzi had a highly imaginative interpretation of Daoism, but this interpretation had less of an impact on the course of Chinese civilization than his contemporary Mengzi, whose interpretation of Confucianism was more influential

Compare "people" to "this interpretation" - NOPE

(D) Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism, though highly imaginative, did not have as lasting an impact on the course of Chinese civilization as had his contemporary Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism

Correctly compare Zhuangzi’s interpretation of Daoism to Mengzi’s interpretation of Confucianism.

Dear sunny91,

A great question, my friend! I'm happy to respond.

There are two issues here. The first is the placement of the verb: at the beginning, as in your (1), or at the end, as in your (2). Here's what I'll say. Version #1 is not wrong, but it's simplistic. Among native speakers, it's how we would expect a child or a relatively unsophisticated writer to phrase the information. Version #2 is inherently more sophisticated and elegant: putting the verb at the beginning has that spark the connotes an intelligent and sophisticated writer. Many many OAs on the GMAT SC have a similar spark to them.

Given that we are going to put the verb at the beginning, what verb to we use? Again, it's not wrong to use "did," but it's less desirable. The forms of the verb "to do" are the generic substitution for any verb, and it's certainly appropriate if there's a long or complicated predicate. See:
Repeating Verb Phrases on the GMAT
Thus, we always could use the generic substitute verb, but when we can, it's more elegant, a tighter and more unified sentence, to use the real verb, and if the real verb is just as short, then there's something almost jarring about using the substitute verb "to do" rather than the real verb.

Here, the real verb is "had," the opposite of "did not have." These are the positive & negative of the ordinary past tense.
I had an ice cream cone. My friend did not have one.
My friend had a dog when she was growing up, but I did not have one.
Coleridge had classical education, but Blake did not have such a background.
The opposite of "A did not have X" is simply "A had X." Those two forms imply each other, especially in a statement of contrast. And, again, it's much better to use the real verb, the contextual verb, rather than the generic substitute "did." Using the verb from in context helps to unify the sentence and give it coherences--also sparks that connote an intelligent and perceptive writer.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep


Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)