GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 15 Jul 2018, 18:00

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 271
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 680 Q48 V34
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2015, 13:48
egmat wrote:
Hi Karan,

You are looking for three parallel items on a single list, but according to the meaning of the sentence, the three items can't be part of the same list, because the first item refers to the composer whereas the next two items refer to the composer's reputation. So, it doesn't make logical sense to place all three as part of the same list, and we need two separate clauses here. (Also, even if we take all three items to be part of a single list, we still can't identify option B as correct because the third item is not an IC even in option B. In this option, the last item is "never regains", so there's no subject that can be parallel to "who" and "whose reputation".)

So, as option C correctly shows, we need the conjunction "but" to create a new clause that is about the composer's reputation (not the composer). Then, we need "and" to join the verbs "declines" and "regains".

So, option C is fine. Note that the 'comma + conjunction + independent clause' structure is not always applicable, so follow the logic and the intended meaning of the sentence at all times.

I hope this helps!

Regards,
Meghna

Although I got the question right and I agree that regain again is absolutely redundant, I can't fathom the idea that regain former status is not redundant.
What the difference in regain his status and regain his former status?
 e-GMAT Discount Codes Veritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes Jamboree Discount Codes
Intern
Joined: 21 Mar 2015
Posts: 15
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2015, 00:42
pau.sabria wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
1. goes into decline does not seems matching with who receives popular acclaim
2. goes into decline not in parallel with never regains popularity

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
Does not express the contrast author wants to show

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
Correct

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
1. Change is tense
2. Does not express the contrast author wants to show

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity
Change in tense(has declined)

If you find any flaw in my explanation, please point it out.
Thanks.
_________________

The only person you should try to be better than, is the person you were yesterday.

And I need your help in this journey of improvement. So if you find any grammatical mistake in my sentences, please ping me a correct version along with the reason.

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 430
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Sep 2016, 02:48
pau.sabria wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

A/ there is a word ''reputation'' in every option but A.
We can write A) in a simple sentence like below:
A) He received acclaim while living but (He) went into decline after death.
He went into death after decline??........>does not make any sense. without the word (reputation) '' often goes into decline after death'' is going to be ridiculous because when someone is dead s/he is already in declined.

There is another problem in A)
A) say " regains popularity again"
Suppose, If I say: S/he is rehired. means>>s/he lost a job and hired again. But, If I say: S/he is rehired again. Means>> S/he lost a job second time and s/he is back for the second time.
Here, the sentence did not say s/he regain the popularity for the second time. So, we can cross out the option A safely along with B and D for using ''regain-again'' as redundancy.

Now, The remaining option is only C and E. There is a parallelism marker in C and E. We can examine it by the following simple sentence:
C) He is a kind of person who receives acclaim, but whose reputation declines and (whose reputation) never regains.
here, declines and regains both are present tense. The parallelism is perfectly fine.

E) He is a kind of person who receives acclaim (1), then (who) has declined (2) in reputation and (who) never regained (3).
Here, I am randomly changing the tense! We should remember that different verb will be parallel if the intended meaning makes sense.
1) says: this is happening right away,
2) say: this is started past but still happening
3) says: this happened past and there is no existence right on the moment. here, 3rd part (regained) occurred before 1st part (receives acclaim) happened>> interesting (which does not make sense).
.................end of story.................
Hope it clears.
_________________

“The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained in sudden flight but, they while their companions slept, they were toiling upwards in the night.”

Manager
Joined: 17 Nov 2013
Posts: 134
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2016, 13:27
Can someone help me confirm this is the correct structure for this question? 'independent clause+ comma + conjunction + independent clause'

Split1) Parallelism and subject agreement."who receives …who declines….and regains" usually is the correct structure for parallelism but not in this one. In this question, you have a curve ball because the first sentence "receives" is talking about the living person, but the second and the third "declines" and "regains" is talking about the reputation. After the first clause you need a conjunction (ex: but, yet, then) to introduce the second clause. 'independent clause+ comma + conjunction + independent clause'. A, B and D are out.

Split2) Past tense and Present tense mix. "who declines....regained" or "has declined....regained". D and E are out.

Split3) Redundancy. Regain + Again is redudant. A, B and D are out.
Intern
Joined: 17 Jun 2016
Posts: 4
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2017, 01:21
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again...(looks right because it is parallel "who recives decline.. and .. regain" but the part "decline after death" is wrong because what id declining are their reputation )

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again ( missing conjunction )

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again ( verb tense wrong .. declines ... regained )

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity ( have conjunction but " has " is wrong, verb tense is also wrong " declined and regained "
Manager
Joined: 23 Dec 2013
Posts: 205
Location: United States (CA)
GMAT 1: 710 Q45 V41
GMAT 2: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.76
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2017, 14:31
pau.sabria wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

A The "composer" doesn't "go into decline after death"; instead, his reputation does.
B The contrast here in meaning requires an appropriate conjunction such as "yet" or "but."
C Correct.
D "Regained" in the past tense does not make sense since the tense of the first part of the sentence is in the simple present.
E "Regained" in the past tense does not make sense since the tense of the first part of the sentence is in the simple present.
Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 85
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2017, 20:33
souvik101990 wrote:
Concept tested: Redundancy, preposition, parallelism, modifiers.
Difficulty: 700
Illustration: Carefully examine the following sentence
My sister, who is a teenager, and whose street play was appreciated by all, won the local talent award yesterday.
This is a perfectly correct sentence as “who is a teenager” and “whose street play was appreciated by all” both modifier the subject “My sister”.

Now lets look at the options.
A is wrong because the composer does not go into decline after his or her death, but his or her reputation does.
B is incorrect because it uses redundant construction “regains its status again”.
D and E are wrong for the same reason we eliminated A i.e the composer himself does not go into decline after death.
C is correct (option C breaks the FANBOYS rule, which a lot of prep companies advocate to eliminate answer choices. Please see below for clarification.).

Tip:
A lot of prep companies adopt the rule of FANBOYS which says
Independent clause, independent clause is a run on sentence.
o to make it correct we use the construction:
Independent clause, FANBOYS independent clause; FANBOYS stands for “For, And, Not, But, Or, Yet, So”.
However, the converse is not necessarily true. Two clauses separated by comma and FANBOYS do not necessarily mean they need to be independent clauses.
E.g My brother loves to drive so fast that his co passengers often fear being headlined in the newspapers the following day, and hates to wear seat-belts.
The sentence without the punctuation would become haywire.
Also, the punctuation rules are not tested on the GMAT.

Great post! MANHATTAN GMAT has a great article on FANBOYS here https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/blog/2016/01/15/gmat-grammar-weekly-fanboys/
_________________

Give me kudos and see what happens to your GMAT score

Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind   [#permalink] 16 Nov 2017, 20:33

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 48 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.