this was great. It does make sense.
I guess you resolved the doubt in AC C as well. I can read "not unable" as "able" which was my main point.
Thanks you have been great.
lee2390 wrote:
The assumption is that the combination of vitamin c and rice/grain will be beneficial or can be consumed
This can be done by process of elimination but that does not work everytime.
Keeping the assumption in mind.m option c says what i am saying. the only trick is the not be unable. This is the catch.
mikemcgarry i am just curious to know whether "not be unable" makes the sentence a double negative.
If it does then is it a good technique to remove both the negatives and then try to understand the sentence.
In addition if you could look at the approach as well. That will be a lot of help
Dear
lee2390,
I'm happy to respond.
My friend, there are two kinds of "double negatives," and there's not really good terminology to distinguish them. What I will call the "crass double negatives" are always wrong:
I don't like no rainstorms.
He doesn't never go the movies. These "crass double negatives" often involve using two strong negative words (no, never, not, etc.) for the same verb. This is typically of colloquial speech among the uneducated, so it always avoided in high quality writing.
By contrast, more "sophisticated double negatives" are typical of sophisticated writing.
The new plan is not without its flaws.
She has no lack of talent.
He was not unwilling to initiate an argument. These are not only correct but regarded as distinctive of sophisticated writing. These are "double negatives" in the sense that we have to think through a double opposite to find the meaning. The first means the plan HAS flaws, the second means she HAS talent, and the third means he was looking for a fight. In fact, all three of these use the rhetorical effect of
dramatic understatement to emphasize a point.
In answer (C), the phrase "
not unable" is a similar double negative, sophisticated and 100% correct. Of course, it means "
able." Also, when it's in this double negative form, it makes it much easier to negate in when you apply the
negation test to find an assumption.
In fact, the GMAT loves to put sophisticated double negatives in the CR arguments, because this changing of direction can be difficult for folks to sort out if they are not reading carefully.
Does all this make sense?
Mike