Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States

Without "not only", "also" is not mandatory. However it is not wrong to use it - it is then used independently, not as a part of a conjunction.

In option b, did is parallel to caused, so why can't we have 'b' as our answer?

The subject "The systematic clearing of forests" should be OUTSIDE the parralelsim structure:

The systematic clearing of forests not only did create, but also caused... this is correct. (subjuect outside).

However if you put the subject INSIDE the structure it should ideally be there in the second element (i,e, in but also) as well. (Remember the once out, twice in rule for parallelism).

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

A. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
- "create farmland" does not have the same verb tense as "gave consumers" -- incorrectly combining present w/ past tense.

B. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast), which gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
- same error as in "A". also ", which" is incorrect/not needed here. there is nothing that need be directly tied to Northeast/farmland.

C. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
- verb tense incorrectly assumes "clearing", "creating", "giving" is all happening in the present tense; however, if you look after the underline, you see "caused" and "deforested" which is past tense.

D. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
- correct as is

E. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it
- "created" and "giving" not in the same verb tense which is incorrect -- they need to be.

key here is to IDENTIFY THE LIST: 1) created; 2) gave; 3) caused; 4) deforested --> make sure these verbs are //

Kudos please if you find this helpful

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.


(A) Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
(it should be Not only +,+, but also + OR Not only -,-, but also - )

(B) Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast), which gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
(it should be Not only +,+, but also + OR Not only -,-, but also - )

(C) The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
(1. +, but also - OR -, but also + -> OK2. parallelism: creating, giving and created -> NOT ok)

(D) The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
(1. +, but also - OR -, but also + -> OK2. parallelism: created, gave and created -> ok)


(E) The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it
(it should be Not only +,+, but also + OR Not only -,-, but also -)
From <https://gmatclub.com/forum/not-only-did-the-systematic-clearing-of-forests-in-the-united-states-81150.html>

generis

Hi,

Just want your help to check whether "it" in option A in this question is needed for the structure "not only/But also"? Ignoring all other problems with option A, I just want to understand if "it" can be ignored in this option? I think ellipsis of subject is allowed for the parallel structure, rite?

Thank you

duybachhpvn , no, we cannot remove it from option A.
I can understand why you would think so, but this structure is stricter than the word "and," for example.

We have the idiomatic structure (the correlative conjunction) Not only X but also Y
We cannot omit parts of speech from Y that are present in X.
Option A: Not only X = subject, verb, verb . . . but also Y = subject, verb, verb.

• Whatever comes after NOT only must also come after BUT also
-- Parts of speech that are present after not only cannot be omitted from whatever comes after but also.
-- Although we cannot omit words in this case, we can shorten by using substitution (the pronoun IT substitutes for the subject)

Let's take the structure in which, like that in Option A,
• the subject is INSIDE "Not only X but also Y"
-- The X can be almost any combination of words.

These examples are both parallel:
-- subject and verb (inverted for the "not" part): Not only can he dance, but he also can sing)
-- subject, verb, prepositional modifier:
Not only can he dance with a partner or alone, but he also can sing in duets or acapella.

• We cannot omit IT from option A
First, let's shorten A and correct the verbs.
Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in Wisconsin create farmland and give consumers cheap houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and quickly deforested whole regions.

Find NOT ONLY. What follows? Then find BUT ALSO. What follows? For this question, focus on subjects and verbs.

NOT (only)
---- subject = clearing (of forests)
---- verb = did create
---- and verb = and (did) give
BUT (also)
---- subject = it (clearing of forests)
---- verb = caused
---- and verb = and deforested
X and Y are parallel.

Remove IT. Find not only. What follows? Find but also. What follows?
Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in Wisconsin create farmland and give consumers cheap houses and furniture, but also caused erosion and quickly deforested whole regions.

Not only
-- subject = clearing of forests
-- verb and verb = did create and (did) give
But also
-- verb and verb = caused and deforested

Not only has subject, verb and verb.
But also has verb and verb.
But also is missing a subject.
X and Y are not parallel.

Hence in option A, the subject, the clearing of forests, which is inside the structure, must be repeated by using the pronoun it.
If the subject is INSIDE the structure, think "twice inside."

• When the subject is OUTSIDE the structure Not X but Y
-- Option A does not use this structure, but we see it on the GMAT a lot

-- If we move the subject outside of the structure, we must not repeat the subject.
(Same technique: Find not only. Then find but also. Does what comes after but also match what comes after not only?)

-- IF the subject comes before ("outside") the structure not only X but also Y.
do not repeat the subject —
because then what follows NOT ONLY does not match what follows BUT ALSO.

Correct: The machine not only copied papers but also date-stamped them.
Subject: the machine (outside not only X but Y)
X = copied (verb)
Y = date-stamped (verb)

Wrong: The machine not only copied papers but it also date-stamped them.
Subject: machine (outside the correlative conjunction)
X = copied papers (verb, direct object)
Y = it date-stamped them (subject, verb, direct object)
Now X and Y are not parallel because Y incorrectly does include a subject.
There is no subject after not only. There should be no subject after but also.

If the subject is outside the structure not only X but also Y, we repeat the subject once.
Think "once outside."

See Mike McGarry's post about "once outside, twice inside," found HERE.

Takeaway: Find the words not only.
Look at the words that come right after NOT.
Find the words but also.
Look at the words that come right after BUT:.
Whatever parts of speech come after NOT must also come after BUT.

Hope that helps.

This question so elegantly tests both idioms and parallel structure.
One thing to always remember is that although if we have idioms like Not only But also, the thumb rule says that both of them should be always parallel to each other otherwise the usage of it is wrong. With that being said lets try to sove the question





Here did is a verb while it also is a clause not Parallel so wrong




Since creating is a -ing modifier we must have a modified verb in the previous clause which is not present


Now this is one looks great created and gave are parallel to each other and 'but it also' symbolizes that its a start of a new independent clause


--Same as A

Dear GMATGuruNY IanStewart AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep GMATRockstar

Why is COMMA + V-ING in choice E. wrong?

The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

IMO, the process of creating farmland by clearing forests AUTOMATICALLY GIVES consumers cheap wood AS A RESULT. (this fits the criteria for COMMA + V-ING perfectly)

When we create farmland, we cut trees. When we cut trees, we have surplus of wood. This chain is very close in time and could be considered to occur simultaneously.
Why is this thinking wrong?

That's not the main problem with E, though it is a problem: logically it's hard to see how "creating farmland" would "give consumers inexpensive houses and furniture". It was the clearing of the forests that did that, presumably because it made cheap wood available. E is grammatically wrong because "not only" is used incorrectly. If you delete the words "not only" from E, at least it becomes grammatically correct. Then you'd need to decide whether "giving" or "and gave" (which would then become the important distinction between D and E) conveyed the more logical meaning.

I received a PM requesting that I comment.

The portion in red misrepresents the conveyed meaning.
Generally, COMMA + VERBing expresses an action that is part of or a direct result of the NEAREST PRECEDING ACTION.
In E, the nearest preceding action is NOT the portion in red (the clearing of forests) but the MAIN VERB (created farmland).
Consider the following sentence:
Mary created farmland, giving consumers inexpensive furniture.
This meaning is nonsensical, implying that the GIVING OF FURNITURE results directly from the CREATION OF FARMLAND.
The creation of farmland -- by definition -- leads to farming: the growing of crops, the raising of cattle, etc.
It does not automatically lead to the giving of furniture.

I understand "but also" can be used without "not only"

Can we also use "not only " without "but also" or they must be together?\

GMATGuruNY IanStewart

The OA to SC800 in the OG18:
Not only are thieves able to divert cash, they can also pilfer valuable information.
Here, not only appears without but.

When it is given an antecedent:
it = PRECEDING NOUN + ANY ATTACHED MODIFIERS

The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland, but it also caused erosion.
Here, it refers not only to clearing -- the antecedent noun in green -- but also to the attached modifiers in blue:
it = the systematic clearing of forests in the United States

Ok , if " but" is not present then we need "also" to complete the idiom.
not only xx, but also yy- correct
not only xx, also yy -correct
not only xx, yy- wrong

Please confirm.

To my knowledge, no OA from GMAC has included the red construction above.
That said, this construction is quite common outside the GMAT.
A recent sentence in the NY Times:
The Basque club has not only forged a unique identity, it has generated a mind-set among its fans.
My advice: 
If an answer choice with the red construction presents no other issues, hold onto the answer choice.
Eliminate it only if you can find an alternate answer choice that avoids the red construction and is free of errors.

I'm really not understanding the pronoun reference for "it" here in the correct answer choice. To check antecedent, do we have to jump over the prepositional phrase and check the subject of clause? Or can the pronoun "it" here also refer to "furniture".

I know referring to furniture here would not be logical, but i've seen so many eliminations based on pronoun ambiguity where one antecedent was so illogical (yet we didn't ignore it) and the other one made complete sense.