NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 07 May 2024, 11:45 It is currently 07 May 2024, 11:45
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

The below is a classic example of distinguishing the

User avatar
vivgmat
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2010
Status:Only GMAT!!
Posts: 57
Own Kudos [?]: 264 [0]
Given Kudos: 24
 Q43  V25 GMAT 2: 590  Q44  V27
GPA: 3.6
WE 1: 5.5+ years IT Prof.
Send PM
The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   29 Apr 2011, 02:56
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

86% (01:03) correct 14% (00:50) wrong based on 7 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
The below is a classic example of distinguishing the difference between the usage of “to” with “and” and “or”
Q.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools.
(A) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools. (B) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted the ownership of cars, the use of electricity, or of power tools.
(C) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or operate power tools.
(D) Owning cars, using electricity or power tools is not permitted to the most conservative Amish groups.
(E) Owning cars, electrical use, or operating power tools is not permissible among the most conservative Amish groups.

A. is wrong.
Reason it says- to own…,use…, or …..
If it would have been- to own…, use…., or operate…… then correct. Because we have “or” in the sentence the parallelism is what I’ve explained right now. Suppose, there were “and” in place of “or”.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, and power tools

This is wrong parallelism because it is …..to own…., ….use…,and …..

Rather it should have been … to own…, to use… and to operate…

B. is wrong because its not parallel… the ownership…, the use…of, or …..
C. is correct. To own…, ..use…, or ….operate… (as explained above)
D. awkward construction wrong.
E. awkward construction/no parallelism…wrong.

This is my understanding....If you have anything else do let me know.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Sentence Correction (EA only) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
User avatar
anstance5
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Status:Never give up!
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma, Omicron Delta Epsilon, Toastmasters Intl, HHonors
Posts: 197
Own Kudos [?]: 59 [1]
Given Kudos: 27
Location: Raleigh-Durham NC
Concentration: Finance, Economics, Accounting
GPA: 4.0 UG and 3.6 MSA
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   02 May 2011, 15:53
1
Kudos
Caveat: my language is way off the technical way to describe English usage, so I'm trying my best to describe as I go. Feel free to correct or clarify.

While "to", "and", and "or" are what you're asking about, I think verb usage consistency is the issue here -- there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense. That's because each part of the 3-part "structure" -- the cars, electricity, and power tools -- could not be "separated with commas" without each "being assigned a verb to qualify them". It just doesn't work if you can't do that.

So C is the only answer that's even possible. IMHO, If there's any hole in my reasoning, I welcome comments. As I can benefit from it too :-)
(Thanks in advance.)
User avatar
vivgmat
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2010
Status:Only GMAT!!
Posts: 57
Own Kudos [?]: 264 [0]
Given Kudos: 24
 Q43  V25 GMAT 2: 590  Q44  V27
GPA: 3.6
WE 1: 5.5+ years IT Prof.
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   02 May 2011, 19:07
abhattac5 wrote:
Caveat: my language is way off the technical way to describe English usage, so I'm trying my best to describe as I go. Feel free to correct or clarify.

While "to", "and", and "or" are what you're asking about, I think verb usage consistency is the issue here -- there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense. That's because each part of the 3-part "structure" -- the cars, electricity, and power tools -- could not be "separated with commas" without each "being assigned a verb to qualify them". It just doesn't work if you can't do that.

So C is the only answer that's even possible. IMHO, If there's any hole in my reasoning, I welcome comments. As I can benefit from it too :-)
(Thanks in advance.)


Its a very good point you mentioned, and I agree with you. Each part needs a verb to qualify. Thanks a lot for pointing this out :)
Yet, I would want you to consider my explanation in a generalized way for handling the Infinitive "to" with "and" and "or". So, what do you think about it keeping aside what you said?
Thanks in advance...
User avatar
anstance5
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Status:Never give up!
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma, Omicron Delta Epsilon, Toastmasters Intl, HHonors
Posts: 197
Own Kudos [?]: 59 [0]
Given Kudos: 27
Location: Raleigh-Durham NC
Concentration: Finance, Economics, Accounting
GPA: 4.0 UG and 3.6 MSA
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   02 May 2011, 19:22
Aaaaah, okay, I see where you were going with it. So is the use of "or" and "and" with "to" mutually exclusive? (Trust me, I know that sounded dumb, but I'm really trying to understand.)

Thanks in advance!
User avatar
contacttoakhil
Intern
Intern
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 36
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Location: Hyderabad, India
WE 1: Deloitte 3 yrs
WE 2: Prok going on
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   02 May 2011, 21:57
MeinKampf wrote:
The below is a classic example of distinguishing the difference between the usage of “to” with “and” and “or”
Q.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools.
(A) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or power tools. (B) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted the ownership of cars, the use of electricity, or of power tools.
(C) The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, or operate power tools.
(D) Owning cars, using electricity or power tools is not permitted to the most conservative Amish groups.
(E) Owning cars, electrical use, or operating power tools is not permissible among the most conservative Amish groups.

A. is wrong.
Reason it says- to own…,use…, or …..
If it would have been- to own…, use…., or operate…… then correct. Because we have “or” in the sentence the parallelism is what I’ve explained right now. Suppose, there were “and” in place of “or”.
The most conservative Amish groups are not permitted to own cars, use electricity, and power tools

This is wrong parallelism because it is …..to own…., ….use…,and …..

Rather it should have been … to own…, to use… and to operate…

B. is wrong because its not parallel… the ownership…, the use…of, or …..
C. is correct. To own…, ..use…, or ….operate… (as explained above)
D. awkward construction wrong.
E. awkward construction/no parallelism…wrong.

This is my understanding....If you have anything else do let me know.


The XYZ group are not permitted to own cars, [to] use electricity, or [to]operate power tools. So C is correct.
User avatar
ashkanator
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 137
Own Kudos [?]: 19 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   02 May 2011, 22:06
i think the main word that makes the difference b/w right and wrong is "operate" in choice C. the original is too ambiguous when it gets to the "or" parallelism and "operate" fixes both issues
avatar
john2roll2
Intern
Intern
Joined: 14 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 25 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   03 May 2011, 04:56
abhattac5 wrote:
Caveat: my language is way off the technical way to describe English usage, so I'm trying my best to describe as I go. Feel free to correct or clarify.

While "to", "and", and "or" are what you're asking about, I think verb usage consistency is the issue here -- there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense. That's because each part of the 3-part "structure" -- the cars, electricity, and power tools -- could not be "separated with commas" without each "being assigned a verb to qualify them". It just doesn't work if you can't do that.

So C is the only answer that's even possible. IMHO, If there's any hole in my reasoning, I welcome comments. As I can benefit from it too :-)
(Thanks in advance.)


Hi, wht did u mean by
Quote:
there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense
.
"are" is the auxiliary here, its in passive voice, permitted is the verb and then to use is the infinitive and i think that not using "to" before electricity and power tools is an example of ellipsis.
cars, electricity and power tools are the direct objects here.

pls do correct me if i am wrong. was just wondering about all the possible solutions to this and this one came to me.

thanks
john
User avatar
anstance5
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Status:Never give up!
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma, Omicron Delta Epsilon, Toastmasters Intl, HHonors
Posts: 197
Own Kudos [?]: 59 [0]
Given Kudos: 27
Location: Raleigh-Durham NC
Concentration: Finance, Economics, Accounting
GPA: 4.0 UG and 3.6 MSA
Send PM
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink] New post   03 May 2011, 10:37
In none of the answer choices other than C was the correct verb form used:

EG "...to (verb) cars, (verb) electricity, or (verb) power tools."

Even E might seem correct at first glance, but "electrical use" is not "using electricity", so it falls apart. In B, the verbs are turned into concepts -- to own > the ownership of etc -- but even then a verb for power tools is left out.


john2roll2 wrote:
abhattac5 wrote:
Caveat: my language is way off the technical way to describe English usage, so I'm trying my best to describe as I go. Feel free to correct or clarify.

While "to", "and", and "or" are what you're asking about, I think verb usage consistency is the issue here -- there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense. That's because each part of the 3-part "structure" -- the cars, electricity, and power tools -- could not be "separated with commas" without each "being assigned a verb to qualify them". It just doesn't work if you can't do that.

So C is the only answer that's even possible. IMHO, If there's any hole in my reasoning, I welcome comments. As I can benefit from it too :-)
(Thanks in advance.)


Hi, wht did u mean by
Quote:
there simply has to be a verb in front of each subject for the sentence to make sense
.
"are" is the auxiliary here, its in passive voice, permitted is the verb and then to use is the infinitive and i think that not using "to" before electricity and power tools is an example of ellipsis.
cars, electricity and power tools are the direct objects here.

pls do correct me if i am wrong. was just wondering about all the possible solutions to this and this one came to me.

thanks
john




Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Sentence Correction (EA only) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: The below is a classic example of distinguishing the [#permalink]
03 May 2011, 10:37
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6922 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
MikeScarn
Current Student
278 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions