Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoug

Anytime you encounter a parallel marker, such as "or," "and," or "but," the marker will be used to connect similar forms. For example:

"When Tim gave dog food to his daughter for a snack, Maria couldn't tell if he was being a jerk or showing signs of extreme sleep deprivation."

In this case, because we have VERB-ing after the parallel marker "or," it's likely that we'll see VERB-ing earlier in the sentence to pair with the later instance, so "being" is parallel to "showing." Both VERB-ing words serve as adjectives describing poor Tim.

Now, keep in mind that parallelism isn't about simply seeking out elements that look the same. I can enjoy swimming and tennis. Here, "swimming" and "tennis," though they don't look alike, are both nouns, and so can be logically parallel to one another. So that's the real test: is the parallel marker connecting two elements that are playing the same role in the sentence?

In (B), we have the following: "the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away, or repression." In this case, "being" is functioning like an adverb, describing the action "to manage." "Repression," on the other hand, is functioning as a noun, and so cannot be parallel to an adverb. (B) is out.

Now take a look at (E): "the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repress them." Again, "being" is functioning as an adverb, not now "repress" is functioning as a verb. Not parallel, so (E) is out.

In the OA, we have "the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried or repressing them..." Now "being" and "repressing" are both offering context for how "to manage thoughts." The forms are logically parallel, so this works.

I hope that helps!

AndrewN

Need super help here! Copying certain sentence from the below post for better understanding.

1. ''When Tim gave dog food to his daughter for a snack, Maria couldn't tell if he was being a jerk or showing signs of extreme sleep deprivation."

--In above sentence, 'being' or 'showing' as -ing verbal modifying the pronoun 'HE' after jumping a verb. Is that acceptable usage on?

I think 'was being' is a verb here with 'was' as aiding verb. If that is the case, are two entities parallel across 'OR'


2. In the original question we have this absolute phrase- ''the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried or repressing them''

Now, What are the modified entities for 'being carried' and 'repressing them''

I think, ''being carried'' can not modify emotions but a human. And 'repressing them is modifying 'thoughts and emotions''. Thus not parallel ??

In such special cases where 'being carried'' is used together, does 'carried' modify noun ( a person in this case) or 'ing verbal' itself ? A big confusion.


Kindly help!

To be honest, himanshu0123, I think both of your questions are answered in the post you quoted. Furthermore, if you have queries on a post written by GMATNinja, I would suggest you follow up with GMAT Ninja. I am sure he could provide clarity on his own words better than I ever could. (I knew it was a GMAT Ninja post as soon as I saw Tim make an appearance.)

I appreciate your thinking to ask for my help, all the same. I look forward to seeing what Charles has to say.

- Andrew

AndrewN

My bad! I will wait until Charles GMATNinja returns.

Meanwhile, may i ask you a simple qsn on parallelism. Below sentence has 'noun+RPC and 'noun+ing verbal'' Is this fine. Have we seen any such issues in OG?


1. The mountainous terrain of Greece, which proves difficult for other stock-raising, such as bovine production, and the climatic conditions allowing for long periods of grazing have made sheep breeding a most important section of animal husbandry in Greece since ancient times.

1. My query is related to the phrase '' the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them''.


I understood the meaning as:

??? One's ability to manage thoughts without being carried away. Here 'being' is referring to person specific. ((implied but not mentioned))

??? 2nd part: the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without repressing them. Here, 'repressing' is modifying the emotions


But I think, 'being carried'' can not modify emotions but a human. And 'repressing them is modifying 'thoughts and emotions''. Will it be parallel then?

Hi Anshul.

Both "being carried away" and "repressing them" are things that a person would do.

That part of the sentence communicates that mindfulness is the ability a person has to manage thoughts and emotions without that person's being carried away or that person's repressing them.

So, yes, "being carried away or repressing" is a parallel list.

Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them, common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others, and self-kindness, a recognition of your own suffering and a commitment to solving the problem.

(A) away or repressing them, common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others,
(B) away, or repression of them, and common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others,
(C) away, or repressing them, common humanity, empathy with the suffering of others;
(D) away or repressing them; common humanity, an empathy with the suffering of others;
(E) away or repress them; common humanity, to empathize with the suffering of others

Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them, common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others, and self-kindness, a recognition of your own suffering and a commitment to solving the problem.

(A) away or repressing them, common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others,
(B) away, or repression of them, and common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others,
(C) away, or repressing them, common humanity, empathy with the suffering of others;
(D) away or repressing them; common humanity, an empathy with the suffering of others;
(E) away or repress them; common humanity, to empathize with the suffering of others

GMATNinja MartyTargetTestPrep
RonPurewal

according to one of the past instructors in the below, the being carried away is both a passive construction and ING NOUN/gerund. so I understand the without X or Y explanation that rendered E wrong.However, can the ability to X apply to "repress" in the....without being carried away or repress them part? is it not valid because them cannot be a pronoun for the "thoughts and emotions"?https://gmatclub.com/forum/?href=-please-explain-being-t58684.html#259089

In option B, I have seen everyday usage that uses ", or insert phrase here" to modify or elaborate an action and circumstances by serving as an appositive phrase.correct me if that is not right. I was looking to see if somehow I missed a possible parallelism in B , common humanity given the first "or" is used as an appositive phrase. B) is sort of a train wreck of parallelism. initially thought it might besomething like a list parallelism: X, Y, and Z and within the element X, you have another appositive phrase that uses Or. but that is not standard usage, unidiomatic.

Don't overcomplicate things!

It looks like self-compassion is made up of three things here: 1) mindfulness; 2) common humanity; and 3) self-kindness. Because each of those elements is modified by a phrase set off by a comma, the three elements need to be separated by a semicolon, so that it's clear when one element ends and the next begins. (Otherwise, it's basically impossible to tell what's a modifier and what's yet another element in the list -- they all kind of blur together.) The only option that does this clearly and correctly is (D).

And for what it's worth, there's no reason why you couldn't have a parallel construction, such as "without being x or repressing y." And there's no reason why "them" can't refer to "thought and emotions." As long as there's a plural noun somewhere that "them" could logically stand in for, it's fine. And if you're not sure about an issue, don't use it as a decision point. Simple as that.

The takeaway: focus on concrete issues first when you tackle SC questions! We only want to wrestle with the elements we're confused about if we absolutely have to.

I hope that clears things up!

With regard to 1), I want to clarify that whether the root phrase "the ability to" manage thoughts and emotions.... or to repress them in E) is acceptable? I noticed that the end of E does not have a semicolon as does the correct answer.
as you mentioned, the use of open parallel marker – or, and, and but – relies on the element that came after the "or" to determine what needs to be parallel. I thought I could argue the ability to repress is the intended parallel..

as a side note, How can I know if the modifier applies to A in the case of A and B+modifier without much context?? e.g., I learned a great deal on this problem from the gmatninja and students lurking on the forum. technically, the modifier - lurking ...could be applied to both gmatninja and students.

GMATNinja

thanks for response. With regard to 1), I want to clarify that whether the root phrase "the ability to" manage thoughts and emotions.... or to repress them in E) is acceptable? I noticed that the end of E does not have a semicolon as does the correct answer.

as you mentioned, the use of open parallel marker – or, and, and but – relies on the element that came after the "or" to determine what needs to be parallel. I thought I could argue the ability to repress is the intended parallel..

as a side note, How can I know if the modifier applies to A in the case of A and B+modifier without much context?? e.g., I learned a great deal on this problem from the gmatninja and students lurking on the forum. technically, the modifier - lurking ...could be applied to both gmatninja and students.

How can I know if the modifier applies to A in the case of A and B+modifier without much context??

In short: you can't! It's the GMAT, and context is crucial. Unfortunately, there are no rules you can memorize and apply to avoid thinking about the meaning.

And remember, GMAT SC is about comparing your options and looking for the BEST one, not looking at single sentences in a bubble and labeling them "wrong" or "right". Often, it's useful to ask yourself: is the role of the modifier clear in one option and less clear in another? If so, then you probably have a vote against the less clear option.

Likewise, is the role of the modifier pretty obvious, even though you could technically do some mental gymnastics to create an illogical meaning? If the logical meaning is fairly clear and obvious -- but it takes some effort to force an illogical meaning -- then the sentence is probably okay. But again, it all depends on how well that option stacks up against your other choices.

As described in our sentence correction guide for beginners (and also in this video), you'll want to find the DEFINITE errors first, and then focus on comparing the remaining choices based on meaning.

I hope that helps!