Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 21 Jul 2019, 03:57

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4487
Re: New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2016, 14:45
jjindal wrote:
mikemcgarry, Is 'Provides compelling support for classification of' correct ?

Dear jjindal,

I'm happy to respond. Let's break this down.

First of all, it is 100% correct to say "to provide support for X." That is a correct idiom. People can provide support for other people or for causes, and ideas can provide support for other ideas.
The IT department provides technical support for the customer service representatives.
Classical Buddhism does not provide any support for capital punishment.


The participle "compelling" is an an intensifier used for logic "support" in a case in which something is an inescapable conclusion.
An impartial examination of the fossil record provides compelling support for the idea of evolution by natural selection.

The word "classification" needs the definite article in front of it in this context:
... provides compelling support for classification of .... = wrong
... provides compelling support for the classification of ... = correct
This is a 100% grammatically and idiomatically correct. It is a bit wordy, and this phrasing is more active & direct:
... provides compelling support for classifying ... = correct
Both are 100% grammatically and idiomatically correct, but the gerund construction in the this last example is rhetorically more successful.

Let's look at this in the context of the end of the sentence
.... provides compelling support for the classification of Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants as separate species.
This is an idea, the idea that "Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants" should be understood and classified as a separate species. Presumably, at one point, folks thought that all elephants were the same species. At some point, somebody had the original idea that "Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants" should be their own species. Any new idea in science is met with skepticism, because other sciences want to know the evidence behind some idea. Well, apparently, the subject of the sentence provided this "compelling support" by providing evidence that make the conclusion unavoidable.

Let's look at the whole sentence:
New genetic evidence—together with recent studies of elephants’ skeletons, tusks, and other anatomical features—provides compelling support for the classification of Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants as separate species.
Again, this is not the best answer, but this is 100% grammatically correct.
The "new genetic evidence" provided convincing proof---that is to say, it provided "compelling support" for this idea, the idea that "Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants" should be their own species.

Does the logic of the sentence make sense? Does this answer your questions?

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)
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Sep 2014
Posts: 23
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2016, 06:39
Hello All,

Per my understanding, the reason for choosing option D has more to do with than just idiomatic expression.

Here, we have a clear split between 'For verb-ing' form and 'to verb' form.

We use the 'to verb' form to express intentions/purpose. In this question, it will be illogical to say that the 'new genetic evidence' had an intent to classify the forest elements...as separate species.

Thus, we can eliminate option E.

Thanks
Akash
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 345
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2016, 18:43
New genetic evidence — together with recent studies of elephants’ skeletons, tusks, and other anatomical features — provide compelling support for classifying Africa’s forest elephants and its savanna elephants as separate species.


D. provides compelling support for classifying
E. provides compelling support to classify

Between D & E
"provide support to" conveys a different meaning. I provide financial support to my sister.
support to & support for has to be followed by noun.(as Provide help/assistance to)

Here idea is not to present intention. But to show that "you have enough evidence for classification"
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 778
Re: New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2019, 22:15
mikemcgarry wrote:
vietmoi999 wrote:
in oxford dictionaly, there is no "support to something" , so C is wrong.

E is wrong for no idiomatic problem but for logic problem.

do you have support for our government? yes, I have that support to get my salary

"to get" is similar to "to classify" because they modify the main clause/main verb.

(evidence provides support) to classify

this is not logic, because "evidence" can not "classify" .

E is wrong for this reason.

one more thing I want to say
many og problems make us choose between do-ing and a noun form such as "trying" vs 'attempt" and in many problems, noun form is correct. why, the answer is long and you should find it in other thread. I say it shortly. doing must refer to a noun which do the action of "doing). f

why in this problem, doing, "classifying" is correct.

we have to use dedicated noun to refer a general action, if we do not have a noun, for example, if we do not have "learnation" we have to use doing to refer to a general action. to refer to a specific action of a specific noun, we use doing.

why in this problem, doing, "classifying" is correct.

frankly speaking, this case maybe a mistake in official problem. gmat is created by human and so, possibly make mistakes. but, academically, what we should learn here is that the above rule "we have to use dedicated noun to refer to a general action" is preferable not absolute rule.

PREFERABLE VS ABSOLUTE RULE is popular on gmat. for more detail pls, search CORRECT BUT NOT PREFERABLE in this form to read my posting regarding this point. some point of grammar is considered inferior and is used to eliminate a choice can be in the official answers in other sc problems.

I wish you comment on my problem so that we can master sc

Dear vietmoi999
I'm happy to respond. First of all, there's no logical problem with (E). It's true that "evidence" can't classify. Remember that an infinitive can have an implicit subject ---
... evidence provides support [for scientists] to classify ...

I'm not sure I understand the rest of your question. The "noun form" of a verb that ends in -ing is called a gerund. That is a good word to know if you would like to understand this form. Here's a blog about gerunds.
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... d-phrases/

We don't have to use a regular noun ("classification") instead of the gerund ("classifying"). I don't think that's even a preference. The GMAT has a preference for action, for direct, active language. The gerund is far more active and vital than is the -tion noun, and that is a definite preference on the GMAT.

Does this make sense?
Mike :-)


thank you Mike
"to do" can modify a noun in "noun +to do". but not all of nouns can be in this pattern. which nouns can be in this pattern are idiomatic point.
we do not have "support to do" in english. we have only "support for doing".

I think there are 2 idioms regarding "support"
support for something/doing something
support to somebody
GMAT Club Bot
Re: New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan   [#permalink] 13 May 2019, 22:15

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 24 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

New genetic evidence together with recent studies of elephan

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne