From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but also unp

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-



Choice A: In Option A, we see an error related to idiom use; the use of the phrase "but also" must be preceded by the use of the phrase "not only". Moreover, there is a parallelism error as the clause "the region’s standard of living has soared" does not parallel the noun phrase "unemployment and prices". Thus, Option A is incorrect.

Choice B: Option B shares the parallelism issue of Option A. Additionally, Option B changes the meaning of the sentence by using the word "and" in place of the word "but"’ the correct conjunction to use here is "but", as the intent is to show contrast. Thus, Option B is incorrect.

Choice C: Option C maintains proper idiom use, conjunction use, and parallelism throughout the sentence and conveys the intended meaning. Thus, Option C is correct.

Choice D: Option D alters the meaning of the sentence in the same way that Option B does, by using the incorrect conjunction "and". Thus, Option D is incorrect.

Choice E: Option E suffers from a verb form error that causes a breach in parallelism. As the first verb in this sentence is in the present perfect form, the second verb must be as well. Thus, Option E is incorrect.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of the “Present Perfect Tense on GMAT”, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

I agree that an auxiliary verb is needed to keep both sides of the question parallel. Eliminate A, B and D. The first part of the sentence uses present perfect, so the second part should also. Eliminate E. It is also interesting to ask yourself when solving some questions whether there is a contrast or not in the sentence you are considering. Soaring standards of living are positive, but rising prices and unemployment are negative, so a contrast is needed. You need “but”.

A B and D elimnated.

Need a but - C & E left.

First part of sentence contains 'has'. The event started from point in the past and continues today, thus use 'have'

Dear expert, I chose C here, but I still need a valid reason why we must write "have" or helping verb in the right hand? Why "but also" alone is not enough?

Thanks!

I thought only "DID" can be used as a pronoun to replace verbs. In C the usage of have is vague. What did the employment and prices do? This soared. Only DID can replace soared right?

In this case, "has" or "have" is not replacing a verb, what's going on is that the past participle "soared" is not repeated.

Here's the sentence created via the use of choice (C).

From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but so have unemployment and prices.

Notice the the first clause uses the present perfect "has soared." The construction that follows "but so" is understood to include the present perfect "have soared," but in this elliptical construction, "soared" is not repeated, and so, we see only "have."

Now, here is what the sentence really conveys:

From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but so have unemployment and prices soared.

The difference between this sentence and the version created via the use of (C), is that, unlike in this sentence, in the version created via the use of (C), the second "soared" is not present. The sentence is understood to convey "have soared" without using "soared."

Thanks for the explanation. Could you go into a bit in which cases you would use did?

How could we change the sentence to make did work here?

Just as we use "so has" or "so have" when the original verb is in the present perfect form, we use "so did" when the original verb is in the simple past form.

So, if the original verb were not "has soared" but rather the simple past "soared," then the use of "did" would make sense, as in:

During the 1960's, the region’s standard of living soared, but so did unemployment and prices.

Hi kchen1994, it might also be helpful to do some basic reading on the various parts of speech.

For example, Pronouns actually replace Nouns (and not verbs).

Also, did is actually a verb and can in fact, substitute for the simple past tense verb of the sentence, irrespective of the tense of the first half of the comparison sentence.

For example, following is a correct sentence:

In the article "Launch it like Steve Jobs", the author asserts that during new product launches, no one has ever captured the imagination of the customers, the way Steve Jobs did.
- The main verb is in present perfect tense (has captured), but did would stand for the simple past tense captured. So, the sentence reads:

In the article "Launch it like Steve Jobs", the author asserts that during new product launches, no one has ever captured the imagination of the customers, the way Steve Jobs captured.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses this property of to do verbs. Have attached the corresponding section of the book, for your reference.

Hi, thank you for your reply. I will take a look at the attachment you linked above.

In your example, doesn't has make the tense present perfect. no one has ever captured the imagination of the customers, the way Steve Jobs did. I am a bit confused here, because the question above uses has soared, and in yours you use has captured. What is different in these two sentences?

Hi! Let's look at the second part of the two sentences.

The original sentence intends to depict:

the region’s standard of living has soared, but so have unemployment and prices soared.

Notice that the second part is intended to be in present perfect, and hence, we cannot use did.

The sentence is my post above intends to depict:

no one has ever captured the imagination of the customers, the way Steve Jobs captured.

Notice that the second part is intended to be in simple past, and hence, we can use did.

Bottom line: did can only stand for simple past tense verb in a sentence.

Meaning and helping verbs theory

First, we must identify that the list needs a CONTRAST, since the first element is a positive one (standard of living soaring) and the second element is a negative one (rising unemployment and prices). Therefore, the conjunction BUT is necessary.

[quote="goodyear2013"]From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but also unemployment and prices.

(A) but also --- it is not parallel. To the right of "but" we have a noun ("unemployment and prices"). To the right we have a clause ("standard of living has soared").
(B) and also ----- it doesn't establish a contrast
(C) but so have ----- CORRECT
(D) and so also ---- it doesn't establish a contrast
(E) but so did ---- wrong helping verb. We are trying to replace the verb "has soared" from the previous clause "standard of living HAS soared". Helping verb TO HAVE can only be replaced by another helping verb TO HAVE, not by the helping verb TO DO.

HI Experts ExpertsGlobal5 MartyTargetTestPrep EducationAisle

I am completely lost in this question with "so".
What the heck ,so is doing in this question. I was dumb stuck at so ( I could understand : have( can not be elliptical ), soared is elliptical), but is also correct)
"So" was like something stuck in my throat, I was neither able to digest, nor able to throw up.


Can I conclude SO= VERB ( given in first half)? So here, so = soared. Is it?

Please advise.

Thanks!

Please refer to https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/so for the various usages of so.

Here, it is used in the sense of in like manner.

The boss works very hard, and so does everyone else.

Please can you help. I still do not understand the difference between C and E. Is it because C has multiple options therefore "have" is used. As opposed to E where "did" is singular?

Trying to understand the general usage difference between DO and HAVE.

Would E) also be correct if it had said "but so do"?

Someone pls help, thanks!

Hey freemanfanmao

Happy to help.


Q: Would E) also be correct if it had said "but so do"?


Answer: No, it wouldn't. Here's why.

From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but also unemployment and prices.

Meaning analysis:

1. The sentence seeks to tell us that three things have soared since 1965 (from 1965 on) - standard of living, unemployment, and prices. This means we need to use the present perfect tense for each of the verbs that convey these increases.
2. There's a contrasting relationship between the improvement in standard of living and the increase in unemployment and prices. The first is cancelled out by the second. This means we need to use a contrast connector such as 'but' and not 'and'.


If we put 1 and 2 together, we get:

From 1965 on, the region’s standard of living has soared, but so have unemployment and prices.

a. 'but' introduces the contrast
b. 'have' is the plural present perfect auxiliary or helping verb. The standard of living has soared since 1965. Unemployment and prices have also soared since 1965.
c. Because the first clause contains 'has' by virtue of the singular subject 'standard of living', we need to change the number of the verb to plural 'have' in the second clause by virtue of the plural subjects 'unemployment and prices'.


No, we cannot use 'do'. "Do" is in the simple present tense. This would make the second clause a universal truth. In other words, the second clause would become "Unemployment and prices soar". This makes no sense in the context of the sentence, since the sentence seeks to convey a few developments since 1965.


I hope this helps improve your understanding.


Happy Learning!

Abhishek