Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jun 3008:00 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
Join us June 30th for 2 weeks of GMAT questions (just 8 per day) to help with your prep and to compete with your fellow GMAT Clubbers for a chance to win a prize fund of $30,000 for you and your team-mates!
Jul 0901:00 PM EDT
-02:00 PM EDT
More Target Test Prep students are earning 100th percentile GMAT scores. Don’t settle for less when the Target Test Prep course gives you everything you need to score high on the GMAT. Start your 5-day free trial today.- Jul 10
11:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
In our conversation, Kishore talks about how strategically he used data analytics to identify high impact areas to focus on as well as his early morning study routine (3 AM prep!) that optimized his GMAT preparation. 
Jul 1206:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join our webinar to master GMAT RC Main Point Questions! Learn effective strategies to decipher passage themes and purposes. Senior Verbal Expert- Sunita Singhvi will equip you with tools to navigate complexities and avoid common traps set by the GMAT.
Jul 1211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.
Jul 1311:00 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Jul 1508:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Jul 1611:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
02 Nov 2021, 21:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi gloomybison,
1. ... the travel industry is under increasing pressure to expand globally...
After the preposition under, we see a noun phrase (here, {adj} + {noun} + {infinitive}). When we say that we ignore the adjective, what we mean is that in this case the combination (adjective + noun) is considered a noun (phrase). That is, the adjective is irrelevant as far as the classification of that phrase is concerned. Here's another way to see this: If we were forced to choose only one of those three elements to follow under, would we go for "the industry is under {increasing}", "the industry is under {pressure}", or "the industry is under {to expand globally}"?
If we don't read the sentence correctly, if we assume that increasing is a gerund and that it is more important than pressure, we are no longer left with "the industry is under {pressure}". Instead, we get something like this:
2. ... the travel industry is under increasing pressure to expand globally...
That would be like saying this:
3. ... the travel industry is under the increasing of pressure to expand globally...
We could read the sentence like this, but we'd be left with the wrong meaning.
If you were asking about option E instead, then yes, that would fix the parallelism problem, but it would make the sentence wordy (because of the unnecessary repetition of from). Of course, there is a meaning issue in E as well (the placement of the adjective future).
gloomybison
Q1) Why are we allowed to ignore adjective "expanding" but not preposition "from" ?
I could have been clearer there. We ignore the adjective only to make it easier to classify that structure. We definitely do not ignore it while reading the sentence for meaning. Here's an example of what I mean:1. ... the travel industry is under increasing pressure to expand globally...
After the preposition under, we see a noun phrase (here, {adj} + {noun} + {infinitive}). When we say that we ignore the adjective, what we mean is that in this case the combination (adjective + noun) is considered a noun (phrase). That is, the adjective is irrelevant as far as the classification of that phrase is concerned. Here's another way to see this: If we were forced to choose only one of those three elements to follow under, would we go for "the industry is under {increasing}", "the industry is under {pressure}", or "the industry is under {to expand globally}"?
If we don't read the sentence correctly, if we assume that increasing is a gerund and that it is more important than pressure, we are no longer left with "the industry is under {pressure}". Instead, we get something like this:
2. ... the travel industry is under increasing pressure to expand globally...
That would be like saying this:
3. ... the travel industry is under the increasing of pressure to expand globally...
We could read the sentence like this, but we'd be left with the wrong meaning.
gloomybison
Q2) if we put preposition "from" before "changes in climate" in choice D would parallelism be correct?
because in D, since "changes in climate" lack a preposition, whereas, preceding and anteceding nouns have a preposition (from) it bugs the parallelism but if we add preposition to "changes in climate" it would fix the parallelism
In option D, there is no from before pollution, so adding a from before changes in climate wouldn't help at all.because in D, since "changes in climate" lack a preposition, whereas, preceding and anteceding nouns have a preposition (from) it bugs the parallelism but if we add preposition to "changes in climate" it would fix the parallelism
If you were asking about option E instead, then yes, that would fix the parallelism problem, but it would make the sentence wordy (because of the unnecessary repetition of from). Of course, there is a meaning issue in E as well (the placement of the adjective future).
gloomybison
Q3) in answer D, "expanding development" is a simple gerund (ı guess) however "changes in climate" and "pollution" are action noun. How is it possible that action noun be parallel with an simple gerund?
I'm not a fan of that rule. In this case, however, we should stick to looking at expanding as an adjective, and expanding development as a noun phrase. This means that there is no problem at all, as expanding development is a noun (phrase), changes in climate is a noun (phrase), and pollution is a noun. 
05 Nov 2021, 13:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
gloomybison
Q1) Why are we allowed to ignore adjective "expanding" but not preposition "from" ?
Q2) if we put preposition "from" before "changes in climate" in choice D would parallelism be correct?
because in D, since "changes in climate" lack a preposition, whereas, preceding and anteceding nouns have a preposition (from) it bugs the parallelism but if we add preposition to "changes in climate" it would fix the parallelism
Q3) in answer D, "expanding development" is a simple gerund (ı guess) however "changes in climate" and "pollution" are action noun. How is it possible that action noun be parallel with an simple gerund?
... from (a) expanding development, (b) changes in climate, and (c) pollution...
Remember to ignore expanding (participle) and in climate (prepositional phrase). Both are just adjectives for their respective nouns.
Option E gives us:
... from (a) expansion of development, (b) changes in climate, and (b) from pollution...
We're fine with expansion (noun) and changes (noun) in option E, at least as far as parallelism is concerned, but then we hit from pollution (prepositional phrase). This is unexpected, because we already have a from outside the list. So this option in like saying:
... from expansion of development, from changes in climate, and from from pollution...
Those two froms at the end of the list are a problem.
He didn't show up for the movie so that we decided to watch it alone.
This example may sound a little (very?) weird, but it is correct.
I'll leave the specific questions here to Ajitesh, but wanted to chime in with a public service announcement: do not invent rules and do not overcomplicate your life with grammar jargon! Q2) if we put preposition "from" before "changes in climate" in choice D would parallelism be correct?
because in D, since "changes in climate" lack a preposition, whereas, preceding and anteceding nouns have a preposition (from) it bugs the parallelism but if we add preposition to "changes in climate" it would fix the parallelism
Q3) in answer D, "expanding development" is a simple gerund (ı guess) however "changes in climate" and "pollution" are action noun. How is it possible that action noun be parallel with an simple gerund?
AjiteshArun
Mehemmed
I'm confused between D and E. I think D violates the parallelism: "from expanding development, changes in climate, and pollution". Shouldn't it be "from expanding development, changes in climate, and from pollution"?
We have a list of nouns in the correct option (D):... from (a) expanding development, (b) changes in climate, and (c) pollution...
Remember to ignore expanding (participle) and in climate (prepositional phrase). Both are just adjectives for their respective nouns.
Option E gives us:
... from (a) expansion of development, (b) changes in climate, and (b) from pollution...
We're fine with expansion (noun) and changes (noun) in option E, at least as far as parallelism is concerned, but then we hit from pollution (prepositional phrase). This is unexpected, because we already have a from outside the list. So this option in like saying:
... from expansion of development, from changes in climate, and from from pollution...
Those two froms at the end of the list are a problem.
Mehemmed
Last but no least, I can't quite understand the use of "so that" in the sentence. As far as I know, "so that" implies intention. For example: "Yesterday, I went to bed early, so that I can get up early in the morning". Here "so that" shows my intention of sleeping early. Am I correct?
You are right. So that can be used to convey intention. However, it can also be used to discuss the outcome of something. Take the following sentence, for example:He didn't show up for the movie so that we decided to watch it alone.
This example may sound a little (very?) weird, but it is correct.
There is no rule that an action noun cannot be parallel to a simple gerund, and there is no benefit to knowing the difference between a simple and complex gerund.
There are only two simple rules in play here:
- 1. If we see "both from X" there needs to be a second prepositional phrase that's parallel to the first, and those two prepositional phrases should be the only two elements in the construction. (Mostly likely, you'd see "both from X... and from Y.")
2. It's fine to write "from X, Y, and, Z" or "from X, from Y, and from Z," but it's faulty parallelism to write "from X, Y, and from Z."
(A), (B), (C), and (E) all violate one (or both) of these rules. That leaves you with (D). No need to agonize over simple gerunds and action nouns.
I hope that clears things up!
25 Feb 2023, 19:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi
AjiteshArun
GMATNinja
The word "the" seems to be missing in the correct option D. Can you please help explain why this is not an issue? I have come across questions where an option was incorrect due to the absence of the word "the".
AjiteshArun
GMATNinja
The word "the" seems to be missing in the correct option D. Can you please help explain why this is not an issue? I have come across questions where an option was incorrect due to the absence of the word "the".
