In comparison to people, elephants are capable of perceiving a much wi

The sentence tests comparison. Let's see which option properly compares frequencies that elephant's ears can pick up with frequencies that human ears can hear.

A) lower than what human ears can hear
If we replace what with frequencies, we get "elephant's ears can pick up frequencies more than 20 Hz lower than frequencies human ears can hear". Ideally, we would want to have "that" between frequencies and human. I guess we need "human's ears".

B) lower than those by human ears
Replace those by frequencies. The sentence does not make sense.

C) lower in opposition to the range that human ears have
This is so wordy and awkward that one should not like this option right away.

D) lower than those perceptible to human ears
Replace those by frequencies. The sentence makes sense. Let's keep it.

E) lower as opposed to humans’ hearing
It is illogical to compare frequencies with humans' hearing.

Frankly, it was hard for me to decide between (A) and (D). I picked (A) originally, but there are more reasons to go for (D) than for (A).

A) lower than what human ears can hear
This one seems fine to me at the first glance, but "what human ears can hear" should refer to the sound that human ears can hear. And sound should not be compare with frequencies.
B) lower than those by human ears
If "those" refers to frequencies, “frequencies by human ears" doesn't make sense.
C) lower in opposition to the range that human ears have
"than" is missing
D) lower than those perceptible to human ears
If "those" refers to frequencies, "frequencies perceptible to human ears" looks fine to me.
E) lower as opposed to humans’ hearing
"than" is missing

In comparison to people, elephants are capable of perceiving a much wider variety of sounds; in fact, an elephant’s ears can pick up frequencies more than 20 Hertz lower than what human ears can hear.

A) lower than what human ears can hear

B) lower than those by human ears

C) lower in opposition to the range that human ears have

D) lower than those perceptible to human ears

E) lower as opposed to humans’ hearing

Lower should be followed by than, so can eliinated C and E. The original sentence is comparing elephant's ears' capability to human ears' capability. In this case, IMHO 'what' goes better than 'those'. A is the correct option.

In comparison to people, elephants are capable of perceiving a much wider variety of sounds; in fact, an elephant’s ears can pick up frequencies more than 20 Hertz lower than what human ears can hear.

The question tests comparison, so we need to ensure that comparable items are grammatically and logically correct.

for the sake of proper comparison, we need to compare frequencies to frequencies, not to "what human ears can hear"

- "those" refers to "frequencies", so if we replace demonstrative pronoun, we'll have "lower than frequencies by human ears". Now meaning suggests that these frequencies not perceived by human ears but rather produced by them.


Easy to eliminate: when two items are compared, comparative adjectives can be used only with "than": more than, better than, lower than, etc.

- correct choice. Demonstrative pronoun "those" stands for "frequencies", resulting in comparison of two logically comparable items.

- same as C, can be easily eliminate for the same good reason - absence of "than"

In comparison to people, elephants are capable of perceiving a much wider variety of sounds; in fact, an elephant’s ears can pick up frequencies more than 20 Hertz lower than what human ears can hear.

Meaning: Elephants can perceive a much wider variety of sounds compared to humans. An elephant's ears can pick up frequencies more than 20 Hertz lower than those [frequencies] human ears can perceive.

A) lower than what human ears can hear.
Grammatically correct. I have kept option A for comparison with option D.

B) lower than those by human ears
by is not appropriate in the context. The use of by makes human ears a prepositional phrase that illogically modifies those [frequencies]. It suggests that human ears produce frequencies, which is illogical. Eliminate B.

C) lower in opposition to the range that human ears have.
in opposition is unidiomatic and inappropriate in the context of comparison. We are dealing with similar abilities, hence there is no need to use words that show contrast. Eliminate option C.

D) lower than those perceptible to human ears
This option is also correct grammatically. Option D is compared with option A below.

E) lower as opposed to humans’ hearing
Similar to the issue of wrongful use of contrasting words when similarities between two entities are compared. Eliminate option E.

Now my headache was choosing between A and D. But looking at the meaning, option A: what humans can hear, means any frequency that humans can hear. It can be loud, medium, or it can be low. But the context requires a comparison between minimum frequency that human ears can hear and that an elephant's ear can perceive, of which we are informed that elephant's ear can hear frequencies 20Hz lower than what humans can hear. Based on this option A can be eliminated as a result of the ambiguity in meaning.
Option D on the other hand, those perceptible to human ears, means that frequencies that humans can barely hear. So it limits the frequency to low ranges and this makes more sense with the overall meaning of the sentence.

The right answer is option D.


The bottom line for me is that meaning is always key.

The official explanation is here

Has option B been changed?

"B) lower than those perceived by human ears" - This is what I see.

Is it wrong?

Yes. Thank you.+1

Just now I edited the question back to its original.
If you look at all the posts that quote (B), you will see the correctly transcribed option B.

I have changed (B) back to the original.
My apologies.

Last night I accidentally posted my explanation in the question space rather than in the space just below the question.

I overwrote the original post when I did so.
I re-posted the question and options—but I used my explanation's already-annotated version. (Wrong.)

The original version has been restored, this way:

B) lower than those by human ear

Thank you.

Just out of curiosity - which one out of these 2 is a better choice?

A- lower than those perceptible to human ears
or
B- lower than those perceived by human ears

kunaldutt15 - As an editor and writer, I would choose (A).

The word "perceptible" means capable of being perceived.

The sentence stresses that elephants can hear sounds that human beings cannot.
In other words, sounds at certain frequencies will never be heard by the human ear; those sounds are imperceptible to human ears.

The word "perceived" can mean "capable of being perceived."
But "Perceived" can also mean "what has [already] been perceived,"
or "adjudged."

Both are correct. "Perceptible" is closer to what I think the sentence suggests.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.