In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted fr

OFFICIAL SOLUTION

On this problem, the easiest Decision Point is a meaning error that relates to the comparison family of errors. In the original sentence, there is an illogical comparison: ”In contrast to 19th-century wars...troops” is wrong, because you can’t compare wars to troops. So answer choice A can be eliminated. Answer choice B corrects that comparison problem (”In contrast to 19th-century wars. . .World War l” is a logical war—to-war comparison) but illogically uses ”its troops” as if WWI possessed the troops. Again this is illogical in meaning, so answer choice B can be eliminated. Answer choices C and D both contain subtler errors of faulty predication; you cannot say ”two-thirds of the troops killed resulted from direct combat.” The troops did not result from combat; the casualties did. Answer choice E corrects that problem and is the only one with logical meaning.

whereas (conjunction) = compared with the fact that; but

1. He must be about 60, whereas his wife looks about 30.
2. Whereas I've always been honest about my feelings, you have not.
3. I'm right-handed whereas my brother is left-handed.
4. Some of the studies show positive results, whereas other do not.

D commits a fatal error of contrasting and equating casualties with the death of troops. Apart from death, which may be only a portion of all casualties, casualties include severe injury, impairment due to abstract emotions such as depression etc, but not necessarily death alone. E corrects this anomaly by correctly comparing casualties with casualties.

Hi bhavikagoyal2009, option B says: World War I had over two-thirds of its troops.

This seems to suggest that troops belonged to World War I.

The basic problem in this question is that the comparison is faulty in all the choices other than in E. From A through D, causalities are being compared with death in the second part. A casualty and a death are not the same. Casualty may well refer to an injured person and not really a dead person.
E is the only choice where the causalities have been compared with casualties and hence, is likely to be correct. We can verify this basic intuition with more cues such as whether wars are being compared with wars.

In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from disease,
over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from
direct combat.

(A) In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from
disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World
War I resulted from direct combat.- Wrong- Compares wars to a number 2/3rd of a troop
(B) In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from
disease, World War I had over two-thirds of its troops killed from direct
combat on the battlefield.- Wrong - Use of past perfect needs a past tense verb, for p-lacing the work properly in double past
(C) In contrast to troops in 19th-century wars, in which most casualties
resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the
battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat. - wrong- compares troops to a fraction
(D) While most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over
two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted
from direct combat. - Wrong- compares most causalities to 2/3rd troops
(E) Whereas most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over
two-thirds of the casualties in World War I resulted from direct combat on
the battlefield.- Correct- Compares most causalities to 2/3rd causalities

Sir I thought the option B comparison is correct but verb form is wrong. Is the comparison also wrong?

pulkitaggi wrote


Yes for sure: the basic gist of a valid comparison is that we can compare X with Y but not with what Y has. This is the error in B.

Hi pulkitaggi, actually B does not use past perfect. While the presence of had and killed might deceptively suggest that it's past perfect, option B is actually in simple past. For example:

The judge had the unruly crowd kicked out of the court room.

Again, above sentence is in simple past.

So, there are no tense issues in B.

Dear VeritasPrepBrian AnthonyRitz IanStewart GMATGuruNY MartyTargetTestPrep,

Q1. What's wrong with D.?

(D) While most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat.

I do not buy the explanation on P. 101 in the Veritas SC book quoted below:

Choice D. does NOT say that troops result from combat. It says troops KILLED on the battle field result from combat. What's wrong with choice D.?

Q2. Does choice E. change the intended meaning from the original sentence by expanding the entire population in question?

- The original clearly states that over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat

The original sentence intends to mean 2/3 of the TROOPS killed on the battlefield in WW I. It limits the scope to be just those involved in TROOPS.

- (E) Whereas most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the casualties in World War I resulted from direct combat on the battlefield.

However, Choice E. shifts this meaning to be 2/3 of all the casualties in WW I. All of the casualties include civilians not involved in battlefield - e.g. children, women, elders, doctors, nurse, politicians, monks, preachers, victims of criminals, hungers ...

IMO, choice E. changes the intended meaning.

Thank you in advance!

I'm sorry that you do not buy the book rationale for why C and D (and A) are wrong, but that rationale is 100% accurate.

As I say in my classes, none of the troops resulted from direct combat. Not the troops who were killed, and not the troops who survived. I hate to have to be the one to break it to you, but all of the troops, including the "troops killed," resulted from a loving evening between their parents. That's where little baby troops come from. Their "deaths," perhaps, result from combat, or their "casualties," but not the troops, nor any subset thereof. This is, by far, the main problem with C and D.

Worse, D compares "casualties" to "troops killed" -- maybe not fatal standing alone, but certainly not a perfectly logical comparison, either.

And now, a few words on "intended meaning": I just want to say that I abhor this phrase, "intended meaning," as it relates to GMAT sentence correction. It's not your fault -- this is an idea that floats around in the larger GMAT community, like a virus. But it's wrong. "Intended meaning" is simply, flatly, not a thing. There is no rule on the GMAT, whatsoever, that requires the correct answer to express the same meaning as the original version of a sentence correction question. The only standard of meaning in GMAT Sentence Correction is whether that meaning is logical or illogical.

Does E change the meaning from its original focus on only troop deaths to "casualties" more generally? Sure, I guess. Also, I don't care. It's not illogical to compare casualties in the two wars, so E is not wrong on this basis.

To add to the above, looking at this answer choice:

"While most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat."

Even if you thought the end of that sentence did not say "troops... resulted from combat" (which is what it does say, so that's already a a major problem), the sentence still contains a flawed comparison. It compares casualties overall in 19th century wars with only the battlefield casualties of WWI. That is not the comparison the sentence is trying to make - it is trying to compare all casualties in 19th century wars with all casualties in WWI.

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-



Choice A: This answer choice incorrectly compares the noun "two-thirds of troops" to the noun "wars". This answer choice also commits a meaning-related error by describing the "over two-thirds of the troops killed" as a result of direct combat. Thus, this answer choice is incorrect.

Choice B: This answer choice incorrectly modifies the noun "troops" with the pronoun "its", which refers to "World War I"; this modification is illogical as a war cannot be said to have troops. Thus, this answer choice is incorrect.

Choice C: This answer choice incorrectly modifies "troops in 19th-century wars" with the phrase "in which most casualties resulted from disease". This answer choice repeats the meaning-related error seen in Option A. Thus, this answer choice is incorrect.

Choice D: This answer choice repeats the meaning-related error seen in Option A. Thus, this answer choice is incorrect.

Choice E: This answer choice conveys the intended meaning of the sentence, by correctly comparing "casualties in 19th-century wars" to "casualties in World War I". Thus, this answer choice is correct.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

COMPARISONS, MEANING




(A) In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat. ---------- "In contrast to" is a comparison marker and requires a parallel structure. Here it is incorrectly comparing "WARS" to "TWO THIRD OF THE TROOPS".


(B) In contrast to 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from disease, World War I had over two-thirds of its troops killed from direct combat on the battlefield. ---------- Comparison is correct but there's a problem with SUBJECT AND VERB AGREEMENT. "World War I" do not HAVE "troops"


(C) In contrast to troops in 19th-century wars, in which most casualties resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat. ---------- "In contrast to" is a comparison marker and requires a parallel structure. Here it is incorrectly comparing "TROOPS" to "THIRDS OF TROOPS".

(D) While most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the troops killed on the battlefield in World War I resulted from direct combat. ---------- Not grammatically incorrect. However, "While" sets a contrasts and we would PREFER to have similar subjects in both clauses to make them more logical. In this case, the first clause has "casualties" as its subject, while the second clause has "thirds of troops" as its subject.


(E) Whereas most casualties in 19th-century wars resulted from disease, over two-thirds of the casualties in World War I resulted from direct combat on the battlefield. -------- CORRECT

What about (B)? This answer choice compares wars with WWI. That sounds suitable. (B) commits the error --> "World War I had over two-thirds of its troops..." as the troops are not owned by WWI.

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.