Inuits of the Bering Sea were in isolation from contact with Europeans

We can simply get rid of choices using - in isolation- as being wordy; A, C and E are out.
Between B and D, the critical point is whether we need the -were– after - than – Yes we do need;’ or else, the comparison turns out to be between Europeans and Aleuts rather than between the isolation of Bering Inuits and isolation of Aleuts

B is bad comparison while D puts it down correctly and hence the right answer
_________________

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning is that the Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than the Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska were.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Comparisons + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• A comparison can only be made between similar things.

A: This answer choice incorrectly compares the verb phrase "were in isolation from contact with Europeans" to the noun phrase "Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska"; remember, a comparison can only be made between similar things. Further, Option A uses the needlessly wordy phrase "in isolation from contact", rendering it awkward and redundant.

B: This answer choice incorrectly compares the verb phrase "were isolated from contact with Europeans" to the noun phrase "Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska"; remember, a comparison can only be made between similar things.

C: This answer choice uses the needlessly wordy phrase "in isolation from contact", rendering it awkward and redundant.

D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "isolated from contact with Europeans", conveying the intended meaning - that the Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated specifically from Europeans. Further, Option D correctly compares the verb phrase "were isolated from contact with Europeans" and "were Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska". Additionally, Option D is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "in isolation and without contacts with Europeans"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated in general and had no contact with Europeans; the intended meaning is that the Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated specifically from Europeans. Further, Option E incorrectly compares the verb phrase "in isolation and without contacts with Europeans" to the noun phrase "Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska"; remember, a comparison can only be made between similar things. Additionally, Option E uses the needlessly wordy phrase "in isolation and without contacts", rendering it awkward and redundant.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

The problem with option B is that it's ambiguous. Whenever you have two options in a comparison in which the difference is a helping verb think of ambiguity

B contains two possible interpretations

(1) Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than [from] Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska.
Incorrect intended meaning

(2) Inuits of the Bering Sea were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than [were] Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska

correct meaning

Since there is an ambiguity the helping verb is necessary

Normally if you have Sub + verb + obj or prep phrase + comparison + object
you may have this kind of ambiguity and you need the helping verb to solve it.

Inuits of the Bering Sea were in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska.
(A) in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than
(B) isolated from contact with Europeans longer than
(C) in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than were
(D) isolated from contact with Europeans longer than were
(E) in isolation and without contacts with Europeans longer than

The first thing which should be on mind when we find out any
any comparison is that both comparators should be equal. Here "X than Y", so X=Y.
"Inuits were isolated" cannot be equal to "Inuits of NP". And if we do so we are comparing
an action ( being isolated ) with directly a noun. Which can never make sense. We have to compare actions here. Hence "than WERE .... " is needed to show that we are comparing the isolation factor for both Inuits.
Anyway, I saw one more interesting point in this Q. How to choose between "C" and "D". I really hate to get an answer -- "It is idiomatic!". I think idioms are goodie packs for native english speakers. Anyways. I think "in isolation from" is not idiomatic. I will love to see some grammatical explanation for the same.

daagh,

Good work on this problem. One quick note about A,C, and E:

Although "in isolation from" is wordy, "wordy" isn't really a clear grammatical rule. I generally advise people to be a bit more specific when ruling out answer choices on the GMAT. If there is a clear grammatical rule (subject-verb agreement, pronoun ambiguity, parallelism, etc.) then always use that before crossing off an answer for "wordiness," "unclear meaning," or "concision." Using this strategy will increase accuracy during the test, but more importantly it will give studiers more direction in their studying because it will show them what grammatical rule they found (or didn't find) and
allow them to study that specific rule.

In this case, the specific rule related to A,C, and E is idioms. (see chapter 9 in the Manhattan GMAT Sentence Correction Guide, if you have it). "Isolated from" is a correct idiom, but "in isolation from" is not.

If idioms are tough for anybody out there, make some flashcards. Like geometry, idioms simply have to be memorized.

Inuits of the Bering Sea were in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and Northern Alaska.
A) in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than
B) isolated from contact with Europeans longer than
C) in isolation from contact with Europeans longer than were
D) isolated from contact with Europeans longer than were
E) in isolation and without contacts with Europeans longer than

The first split you're likely to notice is that between in isolation from and isolated from. Isolation is a noun, and in this sentence isolated is a modifier. The modifier is usually better than the noun in such circumstances, especially when the noun is an action noun such as isolation. Exceptions are common enough that I generally set that issue aside to look for another split. In fact, I generally consider all issues of concision last. But I have a fair degree of confience in this split, and so will eliminate A, C, and E.

The only difference between B and C is the word were in D. Grammatically, B is ambigious between Inuits were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than from contact with Aluets and Inuits were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than Aluets were isolated from contact from Europeans. D is unambiguous. Choose D.

A couple of additional points: First, for more info on choices among action nouns, modifiers, and verbs, see pages 207-211 of our Sentence Correction Strategy Guide. Second, B above may be no more ambiguous than are some right answers. It's only bevause of the split between B and D that we considered ambiguity here. You shouldn't go out hunting for it.

Not always.... in most cases the swap would be very awkward and unacceptable, especially in a main clause starting with a subject.

However such a swap may be acceptable in the following cases:
1. In a comparative dependent clause (e.g.: in the example above)
2. In a main clause when the clause starts with a prepositional phrase. (e.g. Beside the river lay a green field.)

I have shorted the options to C and D . The only reason i picked D is because . In GMAC grammar rules - as far as i know - Verb is preferred over noun.
So, IMO it must be D.

Nightmare wrote


Nightmare has hit the bull's eye yet again... In GMAT, there is a rule known as 'VAN" meaning that first prefer the verb (V), then the adjective (A), and finally the noun (N). This is the rule that has decided in favor of D over C.
_________________

HiGMATNinja, VeritasPrepKarishma

Don't you think, we should have "Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific FROM northern Alaska." in non underlined portion.
_________________

There's definitely nothing wrong with using "of" to indicate somebody's geographic origins, especially if we're talking about an entire group of people (or animals, such as the sloths "of the Greater Antilles...") who are in a particular location.

If we're being super-technical, "from" would arguably imply that you're no longer in that location, and have gone somewhere else. For the most part, there's no reason to say "I'm from Iowa" (stop laughing, Americans -- Iowa isn't that bad!) unless I'm either currently in a different location, or somebody in Iowa is giving me a funny look and asking me where I'm actually from, since I presumably don't look or sound like an Iowan.

Much more importantly: it's an absolute non-issue in the question, since "from" isn't one of the options! So there's no reason to even think about it. And more broadly, I'm not sure how valuable it is to obsess over idioms. They're pretty arbitrary, and there are more than 25,000 of them in English. More on idioms here.

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMATNinja How could I have eliminated answer C without needing to memorize the idiom?

Thanks a lot! Just want to know if there would be other way around that answer since I'm a non-native speaker (I chose C between C and D)

Well, there's no avoiding the idiom here, but bear in mind: 1) it's exceedingly rare that a question comes down to knowing a particular idiom and 2) on the rare occasion when it does, you can sometimes reason your way to the correct construction, rather than memorizing it.

Here, it's perfectly logical for someone to be isolated from something. For example,

Tim has been isolated from his kids since his wife discovered that the clown he hired for his daughter's birthday party had only been out on parole for two days.

Here "has been isolated from" conveys the idea of "kept away from." In other words, there's an action suggested. Whom is Tim being kept away/isolated from? His kids. Perfectly logical.

Now consider:

Tim has been in isolation from his kids...

Here, "isolation" is a noun, so Tim isn't actively being kept from his kids the way he was in the first example. Put another way, "from his kids" seems like an illogical way to modify the noun "isolation," as opposed to the act of isolating. Is it possible to figure out what the sentence means? Sure. But it's not as clear or logical as the first example. So "isolated from" is better than "in isolation from."

The takeaway: don't bother memorizing a bunch of idioms! It's highly unlikely an idiom will ever be a crucial decision point, and on the off chance that it is, try to reason your way through the options as best you can. (For more on idioms, check out this article.)

I hope that helps!
_________________

daagh
in isolation and isolated from both are correct versions. It'll be wrong if I say in isolation FROM. We can't cross out choices A, C and E by seeing the word(s) like in isolation. Could you share your thought if i miss anything, please?
Thanks__
_________________

Asad

Both phrases may be grammatically correct. I only said they were wordy. But stylistically, a verb is preferred over a noun as per the V-A-N rule. Why native speakers do it is beyond a non-native's ambit to analyze since it is a convention and custom.

I did it because I firmly believe in the V-A-N, as I feel a verb is more dynamic than an adjective and a noun and in that order. After all, I could get rid of two wrong choices swiftly, and that matters to me the most.

However, I agree that you may not be missing anything.
_________________

The second "were" in choice (D) is just a placeholder for "were isolated." And yes, the two options you listed mean the same thing (though you can argue that placing the "were" up front makes choice (D) more clear -- if you put the "were" after "Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska," the comparison would be a bit harder to follow).

For more on placeholder verbs, check out this post.

And for our thoughts on the so-called VAN rule, check out this post. It's tempting to come up rules like this an attempt to make the test easier and more mechanical. But even if such a rule existed, it would be unclear when, exactly, you should apply the "rule." So its application would be so subjective that it would be impossible to apply the rule with any consistency.

More importantly, shortcuts like this often do more harm than good: students try to blindly apply these "rules" instead of doing the required hard work of thinking about meaning and context. So it's best not to distract yourself with things like this. It's unsatisfying, but there are few -- if any -- rules that universally apply on GMAT SC, and there's no way to avoid the hard work of integrating grammar principles with meaning and context.

I hope that helps a bit!
_________________

Dear experts,

Does the choice D compare
Bering Sea/EU and Bering Sea/North Pacific
Or
Bering Sea/EU and North Pacific/EU ?

Posted from my mobile device

Though I agree why option D is correct option. In option B and D there is a very minute difference i.e. verb "were" is missing from the second comparison element in option B.
In option B
Can't this be assumed as an ellipsis as the verb used in both the comparison elements is same "were"?

So, the structure of B is:

X were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than Y.

Where:

X - Inuits of the Bering Sea
Y - Aleuts or Inuits of the North Pacific and northern Alaska

This can be interpreted in two ways:

i) X were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than Y (were isolated from contact with Europeans).

ii) X were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than (X were isolated from contact with) Y.

Hence, B is ambiguous.

The addition of "were" in D clarifies this ambiguity, because with D, the only way the sentence can be interpreted is:

X were isolated from contact with Europeans longer than Y (were isolated from contact with Europeans).
_________________