Last visit was: 25 May 2024, 03:08 It is currently 25 May 2024, 03:08
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6944
Own Kudos [?]: 64010 [1]
Given Kudos: 1795
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 427
Concentration: Healthcare
GPA: 3.01
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Nov 2015
Posts: 40
Own Kudos [?]: 33 [0]
Given Kudos: 53
Location: Philippines
Send PM
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6944
Own Kudos [?]: 64010 [1]
Given Kudos: 1795
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Adeodatus wrote:
I answered E since I didn't feel the need to include an "and" to separate "overcompensating" and "growing" as it made it appear as two separate thoughts. The "growing" is due to overcompensating" so I picked that structure. Could you tell me where did I go wrong in this analysis?

There's no reason to assume you're dealing with two separate thoughts unless you have two independent clauses. In this case, we have linked -ing modifiers, so (B) doesn't contain separate thoughts any more than something like "Tim went running and biking" does.

As for the problem with (E), check out our post here and let us know if you still have questions!
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Jun 2021
Posts: 47
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 38
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V40 (Online)
GPA: 3.75
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Okay so I understood all the explanations for why B is the correct answer. But when I first solved this question I eliminated B as it says "one arm is lost it is quickly replaced" and to me it sounds like someone else is doing the replacing and not the starfish.

For eg:- When a F1 cars are racing, and if one tire bursts it is quickly replaced.
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Posts: 5125
Own Kudos [?]: 4685 [0]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Expert Reply
RaghuRamani wrote:
Okay so I understood all the explanations for why B is the correct answer. But when I first solved this question I eliminated B as it says "one arm is lost it is quickly replaced" and to me it sounds like someone else is doing the replacing and not the starfish.

For eg:- When a F1 cars are racing, and if one tire bursts it is quickly replaced.


Hello RaghuRamani,

We hope this finds you well.

To provide a bit of clarity, saying "it (the arm) is quickly replaced" is perfectly correct here because it is the starfish that is taking the action of replacing the arm.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Manager
Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2021
Posts: 227
Own Kudos [?]: 193 [0]
Given Kudos: 93
Location: Turkey
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.69
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Hi GMATNinja

Quote:
Plus, the meaning of the last part of the underlined portion is funky: the phrase “by the animal overcompensating” suggests that the overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm. And that doesn’t actually make sense.


Why do you think that it would be wrong to say that "overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm". Starfish is basically trying to overcompensate or in other words trying to recover from its loss and it eventually grows an arm. Couldn't the very process of overcompensation be in part a means of recovering for starfish? I don't think it would totally be illogical to think that starfish' overcompensating is how it reacts so as to recover an arm

Thank you,
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Posts: 5125
Own Kudos [?]: 4685 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
gloomybison wrote:
Hi GMATNinja

Quote:
Plus, the meaning of the last part of the underlined portion is funky: the phrase “by the animal overcompensating” suggests that the overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm. And that doesn’t actually make sense.


Why do you think that it would be wrong to say that "overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm". Starfish is basically trying to overcompensate or in other words trying to recover from its loss and it eventually grows an arm. Couldn't the very process of overcompensation be in part a means of recovering for starfish? I don't think it would totally be illogical to think that starfish' overcompensating is how it reacts so as to recover an arm

Thank you,


Hello gloomybison,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, "overcompensation" is typically understood to be an error committed in pursuit of a goal; here, the starfish's goal is to grow a new arm, so it does not make much sense to say that it grew the arm by overcompensating.

Overcompensating was an accidental side-effect of what it was trying to do.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6944
Own Kudos [?]: 64010 [1]
Given Kudos: 1795
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
gloomybison wrote:
Hi GMATNinja

Quote:
Plus, the meaning of the last part of the underlined portion is funky: the phrase “by the animal overcompensating” suggests that the overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm. And that doesn’t actually make sense.


Why do you think that it would be wrong to say that "overcompensation is how the starfish replaces its arm". Starfish is basically trying to overcompensate or in other words trying to recover from its loss and it eventually grows an arm. Couldn't the very process of overcompensation be in part a means of recovering for starfish? I don't think it would totally be illogical to think that starfish' overcompensating is how it reacts so as to recover an arm

Thank you,

This certainly isn't a black and white error, but along with all of the other evidence cited in this post, we have enough reason to get rid of (A).

That said, if someone asks you how a starfish replaces its arm and you answer, "by overcompensating," the person asking the question will have no clue what you are talking about. Why? Because "overcompensating" isn't, by itself, an action or a process. You can look up videos of animals swimming or eating or giving birth, but you can't look up videos of animals overcompensating (and if you do, you'd have no idea what you're about to watch).

On the hand (or arm?), growing an extra arm is a process -- one that you can easily visualize. That process can involve overcompensation, but overcompensation isn't by itself the process by which a starfish replaces an arm.

Does that make "by overcompensating" wrong? Maybe not. But the wording in (B) is better.

I hope that helps!
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Aug 2021
Posts: 13
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: Indonesia
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Hi Everyone,

I'm still confused with the use of "with" in the correct answer: one arm is lost it is quickly replaced, "with" the animal sometimes overcompensating and...

My first question: Is "with" acted as a clause modifier here?
Second question: If it acted as a modifier, why do they use a comma to separate the sentence? Is it the right grammar? I'm curious about why there's a comma to separate that and if there's any other example of a sentence using "comma" and "with".

Thanks
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Posts: 5125
Own Kudos [?]: 4685 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
aproposof wrote:
Hi Everyone,

I'm still confused with the use of "with" in the correct answer: one arm is lost it is quickly replaced, "with" the animal sometimes overcompensating and...

My first question: Is "with" acted as a clause modifier here?
Second question: If it acted as a modifier, why do they use a comma to separate the sentence? Is it the right grammar? I'm curious about why there's a comma to separate that and if there's any other example of a sentence using "comma" and "with".

Thanks


Hello aproposof,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the "with" phrase does, indeed, act as a clause modifier; further, the use of the comma conveys that the phrase is a non-essential modifier - one that conveys information that is not vital to the core meaning of the sentence.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 191
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [0]
Given Kudos: 101
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
AndrewN

Hi,

could you please clarify minor doubts with your comments!

1. In this post it says that- option B, the right choice is active, and is preferred because of meaning implications. Any comments?

2. list of modifiers at the end - overcompensating and growing should necessarily be joined with 'AND'? Is it a rule?

[modifier 1, modifier 2, modified entity + verb +object ] Do I need a AND here as well?

3. Moreover, in this question we did not really separate out dependent and independent clause with a comma i.e

[........... , and if they loose one arm they quickly replace it ]

I am assuming '' , and'' started a independent clause
''if'' started a dependent clause + comma+ independent clause -- should have been a full independent clause containing nested sub clauses.
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6902 [0]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Expert Reply
himanshu0123 wrote:
AndrewN

Hi,

could you please clarify minor doubts with your comments!

1. In this post it says that- option B, the right choice is active, and is preferred because of meaning implications. Any comments?

2. list of modifiers at the end - overcompensating and growing should necessarily be joined with 'AND'? Is it a rule?

[modifier 1, modifier 2, modified entity + verb +object ] Do I need a AND here as well?

3. Moreover, in this question we did not really separate out dependent and independent clause with a comma i.e

[........... , and if they loose one arm they quickly replace it ]

I am assuming '' , and'' started a independent clause
''if'' started a dependent clause + comma+ independent clause -- should have been a full independent clause containing nested sub clauses.

Hello, himanshu0123. I am not sure which post you may be referring to in 1, but answer choices (B) and (E) look like a push to me, in terms of verb form. They share it is quickly replaced, and it is (E) that I would argue is more active: they lose one arm versus one arm is lost (passive). But in terms of meaning, (B) is clearer, more direct: a lost arm is replaced. In (E), the starfish (plural) lose an arm and it (the arm) is replaced. The pronouns may not be incorrect in (E), but they are not as readily understood as the iteration of the sentence without them.

Concerning 2, no, do not look to create a rule about joining parallel elements, even modifiers, with and. For instance, I could see a sentence talking about a released prisoner ending in sometimes withdrawing, persecuted by society. Rather, ask yourself whether back-to-back modifiers make sense as they appear. In this particular sentence, sometimes overcompensating, growing an extra one or two forces us to look back to decide how to qualify the latter modifier. Ideally, we should be able to read a sentence from left to right, without having to work too hard. And allows us to do just that.

Finally, the comma is optional in this if X, [then] Y construct. Perhaps the author felt that the sentence had enough commas already and that adding another would hinder the delivery of vital meaning. I mean, the sentence already starts with a subject, then a phrase, then a predicate, and by the time we jump into the second clause, the sentence has seesawed a few times. Even one more comma might make the sentence too choppy. It is just a matter of preference.

Thank you for thinking to ask. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
Manager
Manager
Joined: 02 May 2020
Posts: 58
Own Kudos [?]: 23 [0]
Given Kudos: 26
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
THIS QUESTION MUST NEVER APPEAR ON THE EXAM
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1365
Own Kudos [?]: 214 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Hi avigutman - happy holidays. I did select the OA but i did have 2 quick questions

------------------------------------

Q1) Is 'starfish' a collective noun ? It is.

Per my understanding -- collective nouns are singular if we are stressing the 'uniformity' or 'togetherness' of the group

Aren't we doing just that ? we are stressing the 'uniformity' of the starfish (i.e. -- all starfish do this)

Hence I thought, the intended goal was to stress 'uniformity' / 'common characteristic'

Hence i was confused about the plural "have"

"Have" is non-underlined so its not really an issue but theoritically, there is something wrong in my theory.

-----------------------------------

Q2) The placement of word "sometimes" in (B) vs (E).

I see that there are other issues in (B) vs (E) but the placement of word "sometimes" is apparently a genuine split.

I am not able to 'enunciate' why the placement of "sometimes" changes the meaning in (C) vs (E).

Could you think of a simple analogy, with the usage of the word 'sometimes', to perhaps explain how the placement of the adverb "Sometimes" is muddling the meaning.in (E)

Thank you !
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 3480
Own Kudos [?]: 5158 [0]
Given Kudos: 1431
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Send PM
Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
happy holidays. I did select the OA but i did have 2 quick questions

------------------------------------

Q1) Is 'starfish' a collective noun ? It is.

Per my understanding -- collective nouns are singular if we are stressing the 'uniformity' or 'togetherness' of the group

Aren't we doing just that ? we are stressing the 'uniformity' of the starfish (i.e. -- all starfish do this)

Hence I thought, the intended goal was to stress 'uniformity' / 'common characteristic'

Hence i was confused about the plural "have"

"Have" is non-underlined so its not really an issue but theoritically, there is something wrong in my theory.

"Starfish" is not a collective noun. It's a plural noun that names the animals in a general category, "starfish." Thus, the plural "have" is the correct verb to use with the plural "starfish."

Quote:
Q2) The placement of word "sometimes" in (B) vs (E).

I see that there are other issues in (B) vs (E) but the placement of word "sometimes" is apparently a genuine split.

I am not able to 'enunciate' why the placement of "sometimes" changes the meaning in (C) vs (E).

Could you think of a simple analogy, with the usage of the word 'sometimes', to perhaps explain how the placement of the adverb "Sometimes" is muddling the meaning.in (E)

Thank you !

The placement of "sometimes" next to "overcompensating" in (B) makes the meaning a little clearer.

Notice that "is replaced, sometimes with the animal overcompensating" in (E) could be read as conveying that the arm is REPLACED WITH THE ANIMAL that is overcompensating.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4388
Own Kudos [?]: 30935 [0]
Given Kudos: 640
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Expert Reply
Hello jabhatta2,

I will be glad to help you with this one. :)


Quote:
Q1) Is 'starfish' a collective noun ? It is.

Per my understanding -- collective nouns are singular if we are stressing the 'uniformity' or 'togetherness' of the group

Aren't we doing just that ? we are stressing the 'uniformity' of the starfish (i.e. -- all starfish do this)

Hence I thought, the intended goal was to stress 'uniformity' / 'common characteristic'

Hence i was confused about the plural "have"

"Have" is non-underlined so its not really an issue but theoritically, there is something wrong in my theory.


The use of the plural verb "have" makes it clear that "starfish" is NOT a collective noun. The plural of "starfish" is "starfish" only. The plural of "fish" is also "fish". The word "fishes" refers to many different species of fish. Yes, we use this word indiscriminately; however, the usage stands incorrect.


Quote:
Q2) The placement of word "sometimes" in (B) vs (E).

I see that there are other issues in (B) vs (E) but the placement of word "sometimes" is apparently a genuine split.

I am not able to 'enunciate' why the placement of "sometimes" changes the meaning in (C) vs (E).

Could you think of a simple analogy, with the usage of the word 'sometimes', to perhaps explain how the placement of the adverb "Sometimes" is muddling the meaning.in (E)



The word "sometimes" is meant to modify the action "overcompensating". This action takes place sometimes. Hence, it should be placed before it. The phrase "sometimes by the animal" in Choices A & C and "sometimes with the animal" in Choice E seem to suggest that sometimes starfish overcompensate; sometimes someone else does so. Moreover, the use of "with the animal" is incorrect. The actions are done BY the animal.


Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1365
Own Kudos [?]: 214 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Here is a simple example of (B) vs (E) and the use of sometimes

Quote:
(1) I drink soup, sometimes with a large spoon
vs
(2) I drink soup, with a spoon sometimes large

** large is analagous to overcompensating


(1) -- i sometimes drink soup with a spoon. Sometimes I drink with no spoon (maybe i use a straw or i just slurp it down)

Whenever I drink with a spoon - i tend to use a large spoon ?

i actually think -- (1) allows me to use a medium size or small size spoon too

so (1) is all encompassing
- no spoon
- spoon (large)
- spoon (medium)
- spoon (small)


------------------------------------

(2) I always drink soup with the help of a spoon (no exceptions)

regarding the spoon i use when having soup

- the spoon itself could be large

or

- drink soup with a spoon (but size -- medium or small)

(2) is a bit more restrictive - straws or slurping IS NEVER AN option

----------

Applying this

IN (E) -- is like (1) above.

(E) gives the impression that -- perhaps sometimes NO REGENERATION HAPPENS at all ( no fingers are re-generated whatsoever)
vs
(b) says -- regeneration always HAPPENS. However when you re-generate -- sometimes exact fingers are produced vs sometimes extra fingers are produced
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Jul 2023
Posts: 35
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 18
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
Official explanation:
B is correct because both the conditional clause and the result clause have passive form, whilst E is wrong because conditional clause is active and result clause is passive.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2019
Posts: 111
Own Kudos [?]: 32 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V36
GMAT 2: 730 Q51 V38
GMAT 3: 770 Q51 V45
GPA: 4
WE:Project Management (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
I saw your other post where you mentioned that:
With + Noun + Participle is always wrong when it contains a full action (somebody doing something).
Here Somebody is 'animal' and something is ' overcompensating'. Why we treated this case as an exception to the rule?

mikemcgarry wrote:
macjas wrote:
Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regenerative ability, and if one arm is lost it quickly replaces it, sometimes by the animal overcompensating and growing an extra one or two.

(A) one arm is lost it quickly replaces it, sometimes by the animal overcompensating and
(B) one arm is lost it is quickly replaced, with the animal sometimes overcompensating and
(C) they lose one arm they quickly replace it, sometimes by the animal overcompensating,
(D) they lose one arm they are quickly replaced, with the animal sometimes overcompensating,
(E) they lose one arm it is quickly replaced, sometimes with the animal overcompensating,

JusTLucK04 wrote:
Can you please give your expert opinion on B vs E..
Thank You

Dear JusTLucK04,
I am happy to respond to your p.m.

I realize this is an official question, but I would call this problem one of GMAC's clunkers. It has a clear answer, but it falls short of the standards that the GMAT normally has on SC. In particular, the "with" + [noun] + [participial phrase] structure, as a substitute for a clause, is often something GMAC has considered wrong in other, better written questions, but here it is simply unavoidable. To umeshpatil, I would say: in the active voice, neither "with" nor "by" is ideal; for a new action, ideally we should have a whole new clause.

First of all, the first part is more elegant in (B):
(B) one arm is lost it is quickly replaced = concise and elegant
(E) they lose one arm it is quickly replaced = awkward
The former focuses exclusively on one subject, "one arm;" it has rhetorical focus. The latter jumps back and forth between two subjects --- the "starfish" and the "one arm." If (E) were entirely active, "if they lose one arm, they replace it," then there would be a consistent subject and consistent active voice. As it stands, (E) juxtaposes two subjects and also juxtaposes active vs. passive voice, all in a tiny clause. It's very awkward.

One crucial split in this sentence is the placement of the word "sometimes" --- exactly what should this word modify? We are already talking about the event in which the starfish loses an arm. Obviously, if the arm is replace, the animal is always the one who replaces it. The "sometimes" refers to the events in which multiple arms replace a single arm --- that sometimes happens. The placement in (E),
(E) ... sometimes with the animal overcompensating ...
suggests that sometimes the animal's action replaces the arm, and sometimes is something other than the animal replacing the arm. That's nonsensical. By contrast, (B) has:
(B) ... with the animal sometimes overcompensating and ...
Yes. It's the overcompensating that happens only sometimes, but it is always the action of the animal.

Finally, for the split at the end: this is one respect in which (B) is not ideal. I think it is awkward to put those two participles in parallel, "overcompensating and growing ..." Really, those are not two separate actions. Instead, the latter is an explanation of the former: what do we mean that starfish "overcompensates"? We mean that the starfish sometimes grows extra arms. It is an explanation of the same action, not a new action. Therefore, I think putting the two participles in parallel is less than ideal. It would be much better to give them the relationship that (E) has: "overcompensating, [that is to say] growing ..."

So (B) is the best answer, but it is not ideal. In fact, the entire question is not ideal, and it's no surprise that the GMAT got rid of it in its current material.

Let me know if anyone has any further questions.
Mike :-)
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Starfish, with anywhere from five to eight arms, have a strong regener [#permalink]
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6944 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts