Last visit was: 10 Jul 2025, 07:12 It is currently 10 Jul 2025, 07:12
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
User avatar
shanks2020
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 3,874
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,874
Kudos: 3,573
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
shanks2020
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 21 Mar 2024
Posts: 239
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 239
Kudos: 36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 3,874
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,874
Kudos: 3,573
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020
But without "that", how can we know it is a noun + noun modifier?
There is neither a verb-ed/verb-ing modifier nor "that"/"which" which are generally indicators that describe the noun.
Correct, but as you mentioned, these generally are indicators that describe the noun.

So, in this case, we need to understand that that is implied.
User avatar
Fdambro294
Joined: 10 Jul 2019
Last visit: 06 Apr 2025
Posts: 1,353
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,658
Posts: 1,353
Kudos: 705
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I chose the correct response, basically following EMPOWERgmatVerbal and the approach he used. The only one that could possible be considered Parallel is Answer Choice A.

My question is the following: too many times I’ve read that a “comma, -ed” Past Participle at the end of the sentence can NOT be considered an adverbial modifier.

Does this question therefore prove that there are exceptions to this “rule”?

I say “rule” because I think most people who cite this say that the GMAT never takes the position. This question seems to fly in the face of that.

EDIT: hmmm, never mind. I suppose these are a list of Noun Modifiers at the end of a sentence?

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
EMPOWERgmatVerbal
User avatar
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Last visit: 17 Feb 2025
Posts: 1,694
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 766
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,694
Kudos: 15,050
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Fdambro294
I chose the correct response, basically following EMPOWERgmatVerbal and the approach he used. The only one that could possible be considered Parallel is Answer Choice A.

My question is the following: too many times I’ve read that a “comma, -ed” Past Participle at the end of the sentence can NOT be considered an adverbial modifier.

Does this question therefore prove that there are exceptions to this “rule”?

I say “rule” because I think most people who cite this say that the GMAT never takes the position. This question seems to fly in the face of that.

EDIT: hmmm, never mind. I suppose these are a list of Noun Modifiers at the end of a sentence?

Posted from my mobile device

Thanks for bringing this up Fdambro294! Yes, these are noun modifiers that are listed at the end of a sentence, which is why they seem so awkward. I don't think this is something you'll see very often on the GMAT or in everyday writing, thankfully. However, it is good to see examples of exceptions to the rules, and this is a great one!
User avatar
gvij2017
Joined: 09 Aug 2017
Last visit: 18 Jun 2024
Posts: 675
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 778
Posts: 675
Kudos: 468
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi there!
In many posts, folks gives the reason of striking off a choice is that choice is not acceptable or choice is awkward.
I don't think such reason to keep the choice out of the race of winner is correct.

What I understand is that we have to pick the best out of five choices. No matter if the best choice has a small mistake or needs a small correction.

Therefore, option A needs "and" but as option A is best among given choices, A wins.



EducationAisle
You are right Sunny. Ideally, there should have been an and; however, this is just an acceptable writing style, especially used to emphasize attributes.
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 3,874
Own Kudos:
3,573
 [2]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,874
Kudos: 3,573
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gvij2017
No matter if the best choice has a small mistake or needs a small correction.
That's not a good way to look at officially correct answer choices.

A correct answer choice means that GMAT, at the very least, considers it acceptable (and not just because it has least number of mistakes).
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,055
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,055
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
EducationAisle
That's not a good way to look at officially correct answer choices.

A correct answer choice means that GMAT, at the very least, considers it acceptable (and not just because it has least number of mistakes).
I agree. Some of the replies in this thread indicate that there is something wrong with what the correct option does. That is not the case. There is nothing wrong with the omission of the and in option A.
avatar
RupalTot123
Joined: 17 Feb 2020
Last visit: 21 May 2022
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 254
Posts: 6
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
CJAnish, ChiranjeevSingh, GMATNinja
Kindly throw some light on tackling this kind of a question.
Thanks a lot! :)
User avatar
vv65
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
390
 [1]
Given Kudos: 771
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 390
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Despite the lack of an 'AND', does anyone really doubt that the sentence ends with a list?
And everyone knows that list items HAVE to be parallel.
Everyone also knows that parallelism is probably the most tested issue in Sentence Correction.

So it's best to just focus on checking which answer choice provides a parallel list.

GMAT courses and tutors talk about stuff that will be useful in the GMAT, stuff that the GMAT tests routinely. They do not talk about stuff that has never been seen in any OG or question pack. What use would that be?

Yes, the GMAC does occasionally throw in a one-off. Unfortunately, there's no way a teacher can prepare test-takers for every such surprise: the English language is just too big (and preparing for the GMAT is already a huge task)

Sentences such as this one - with a list that has no AND - are rare. That does not mean they are unacceptable! In fact, this sentence sounds acceptable to anyone who reads extensively.

Moral of the story is that we stick to basics in tough situations. If the sentence contains a list, we check whether the list items are parallel.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
warrior1991
Joined: 03 Mar 2017
Last visit: 03 Feb 2022
Posts: 573
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 596
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Technology
Products:
Posts: 573
Kudos: 433
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
RupalTot123
CJAnish, ChiranjeevSingh, GMATNinja
Kindly throw some light on tackling this kind of a question.
Thanks a lot! :)
This question is mostly about parallelism. The non-underlined portion ends with a list of attributes (describing Sartre's opinion), so we're expecting another attribute to complete the list. The first two attributes (“painfully considered, elaborately reasoned”) show us the pattern: adverb adjective, adverb adjective.

Choice (A) gives us exactly what we expect: another attribute that describes Sartre's opinion, in the form "adverb adjective" ("often changed"). So (A) is looking pretty good, but let's see if we can eliminate the others.

Quote:
(B) and it was usually changed
If we only had "usually changed" instead of "it was usually changed," then (B) would be tempting. Again, the first two elements of the list are in the form "adverb + adjective," so we expect something similar in the final part.

Instead, we get "pronoun + verb + adverb + adjective"--the addition of a subject pronoun and verb ("it was") makes it seem like we are starting an entirely new sentence, rather than continuing the list of attributes.

That's not what we want, so we can get rid of (B).

Quote:
(C) that was often changed
This would be fine if the “that was” came before the whole list: “…had an opinion on everything that was painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, [and] often changed.” But at the end of the list, "that was" doesn't make any sense and throws off the parallelism. (C) is out.

Quote:
(D) changing often
Here the parallelism might technically be ok because we have another attribute that describes Sartre's opinion ("changing often"). But unlike in (A), we don't get a nice, clean (and easy-to-follow) list of "adverb + adjective" pairs.

Moreover, since we are talking about Sartre's opinion in the past, the opinion shouldn’t be “changing often"--this seems to imply that the opinion is STILL changing in the present.

In contrast, "considered" and "reasoned" suggest actions that were performed ON the opinions in the past--the opinions were painfully considered BY Sartre, and the opinions were elaborately reasoned BY Sartre. That pattern doesn't work with the third item: "The opinions were changing often by Sartre" doesn't make sense.

On the other hand, choice (A) implies that "the opinions were often changed by Sartre," which makes more sense and fits with the pattern of the first two attributes. This makes (A) the better choice, so we can eliminate (D).

Quote:
(E) one he often changed
You can get rid of (E) pretty quickly because it doesn't fit with the parallel structure at all. Using this option, the list of attributes has the form: "(1) adverb adjective, (2) adverb adjective, (3) pronoun ("one") noun modifier ("[that] he often changed")--the parallelism is clearly better in (A).

That's enough reason to get rid of (E). But if (and only if) you'd like nerd out and dive a little deeper on this one, keep reading...

Aside from the obvious deviation from the part of speech pattern, there is another really subtle reason that the parallelism isn't ideal here:

  • The first two items in the list describe what Sartre’s opinion was like, without mentioning specific action by Sartre: his opinion was considered and reasoned. (If you like the jargon, this is the passive voice). As we saw in option (D), the first two elements imply actions performed ON the opinions.
  • But with "one he often changed," "he" is the subject of the verb "changed." This active construction gives Sartre more agency—he is the one specifically changing the opinion, as opposed to the opinion having been changed BY him.
  • Simply put, because two of the elements in the list are in the passive voice and one is in the active, the parallelism isn't as good as it is in option (A). Again, you don't need to go there to get rid of (E), but this gives us one more vote for (A) over (E) :).

In any case, (A) is our best option.

I hope that helps!

GMATNinja

What about and before that last item in the list('and' before often changed)??

x,Y,and Z is the correct structure. Please help !
User avatar
beeblebrox
Joined: 08 Dec 2020
Last visit: 24 Oct 2022
Posts: 61
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 922
Posts: 61
Kudos: 35
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
RupalTot123
CJAnish, ChiranjeevSingh, GMATNinja
Kindly throw some light on tackling this kind of a question.
Thanks a lot! :)
This question is mostly about parallelism. The non-underlined portion ends with a list of attributes (describing Sartre's opinion), so we're expecting another attribute to complete the list. The first two attributes (“painfully considered, elaborately reasoned”) show us the pattern: adverb adjective, adverb adjective.

Choice (A) gives us exactly what we expect: another attribute that describes Sartre's opinion, in the form "adverb adjective" ("often changed"). So (A) is looking pretty good, but let's see if we can eliminate the others.

Quote:
(B) and it was usually changed
If we only had "usually changed" instead of "it was usually changed," then (B) would be tempting. Again, the first two elements of the list are in the form "adverb + adjective," so we expect something similar in the final part.

Instead, we get "pronoun + verb + adverb + adjective"--the addition of a subject pronoun and verb ("it was") makes it seem like we are starting an entirely new sentence, rather than continuing the list of attributes.

That's not what we want, so we can get rid of (B).

Quote:
(C) that was often changed
This would be fine if the “that was” came before the whole list: “…had an opinion on everything that was painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, [and] often changed.” But at the end of the list, "that was" doesn't make any sense and throws off the parallelism. (C) is out.

Quote:
(D) changing often
Here the parallelism might technically be ok because we have another attribute that describes Sartre's opinion ("changing often"). But unlike in (A), we don't get a nice, clean (and easy-to-follow) list of "adverb + adjective" pairs.

Moreover, since we are talking about Sartre's opinion in the past, the opinion shouldn’t be “changing often"--this seems to imply that the opinion is STILL changing in the present.

In contrast, "considered" and "reasoned" suggest actions that were performed ON the opinions in the past--the opinions were painfully considered BY Sartre, and the opinions were elaborately reasoned BY Sartre. That pattern doesn't work with the third item: "The opinions were changing often by Sartre" doesn't make sense.

On the other hand, choice (A) implies that "the opinions were often changed by Sartre," which makes more sense and fits with the pattern of the first two attributes. This makes (A) the better choice, so we can eliminate (D).

Quote:
(E) one he often changed
You can get rid of (E) pretty quickly because it doesn't fit with the parallel structure at all. Using this option, the list of attributes has the form: "(1) adverb adjective, (2) adverb adjective, (3) pronoun ("one") noun modifier ("[that] he often changed")--the parallelism is clearly better in (A).

That's enough reason to get rid of (E). But if (and only if) you'd like nerd out and dive a little deeper on this one, keep reading...

Aside from the obvious deviation from the part of speech pattern, there is another really subtle reason that the parallelism isn't ideal here:

  • The first two items in the list describe what Sartre’s opinion was like, without mentioning specific action by Sartre: his opinion was considered and reasoned. (If you like the jargon, this is the passive voice). As we saw in option (D), the first two elements imply actions performed ON the opinions.
  • But with "one he often changed," "he" is the subject of the verb "changed." This active construction gives Sartre more agency—he is the one specifically changing the opinion, as opposed to the opinion having been changed BY him.
  • Simply put, because two of the elements in the list are in the passive voice and one is in the active, the parallelism isn't as good as it is in option (A). Again, you don't need to go there to get rid of (E), but this gives us one more vote for (A) over (E) :).

In any case, (A) is our best option.

I hope that helps!


Hi GMATNinja

This is how I deconstructed the statement:

X had an opinion & that opinion

a) was painfully considered
b) was elaborately reasoned
c) was changing often


I was stuck between A & D because the opinion was often changed in this case would be incorrect.

We can certainly write opinion was changing often, as the opinion was changing often in past, I guess there is nothing wrong in that structure-wise or grammatically.

I am not sure if this sentence observes proper construction.

Please help?
User avatar
vv65
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
390
 [3]
Given Kudos: 771
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 390
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Everyone who is asking about the missing AND - please accept that dropping the AND is acceptable!

In fact, a list without a conjunction even has a name :) It is called an asyndeton
See for example https://www.thefreedictionary.com/asyndeton
And https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/asyndeton
You can google and find lots of examples
User avatar
vv65
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 771
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 390
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
beeblebrox
This is how I deconstructed the statement:

X had an opinion & that opinion

a) was painfully considered
b) was elaborately reasoned
c) was changing often


I was stuck between A & D because the opinion was often changed in this case would be incorrect.

We can certainly write opinion was changing often, as the opinion was changing often in past, I guess there is nothing wrong in that structure-wise or grammatically.

I am not sure if this sentence observes proper construction.
Sartre ... had an opinion on everything, painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed.
(A) often changed
(D) changing often

Between A and D , A is more parallel
And it's not wrong to say that the opinion was often changed

'Considered', 'reasoned', and 'changed' are all active actions

The opinion was
painfully considered (by Sartre),
elaborately reasoned (by Sartre),
often changed (by Sartre)

Hope this helps

Posted from my mobile device
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,372
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,372
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
warrior1991
AndrewN

What about using 'and' before that last item in the list('and' before often changed)??

X,Y,and Z is the correct structure. Please help !
The sentence is written a bit more poetically than usual, warrior1991. However, the verb-ed modifiers are simply stacked, one after another, and there is no rule that dictates the presence of an and before the final item. Writers such as Hemingway and Faulkner could stretch a sentence across an entire page by resorting to such methods. I wonder whether people would have the same problem if the modifiers followed an em dash or a colon. For example, I might put a florid touch on a sentence about a knight: The knight embodied every virtue of his trade—he was bold, chivalrous, daring.

Just when you think you know everything about grammar, the messiness of human language works its way in to show you an exception. Anyway, I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me.

- Andrew
User avatar
GMATGuruNY
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 1,345
Own Kudos:
3,658
 [8]
Given Kudos: 9
Schools:Dartmouth College
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,345
Kudos: 3,658
 [8]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
On the GMAT, consecutive parallel forms may sometimes lack a conjunction.
The omission of a conjunction is a device known as asyndeton.
Official examples of this device:

The hognose snake puts on an impressive bluff, hissing and rearing back, broadening the flesh behind its head the way a cobra does and feigning repeated strikes.

In a state of pure commercial competition, there would be a large number of producing firms, all unfettered by governmental regulations, each seeking to meet consumer needs and wants more successfully than the others.

So dogged were Frances Perkins' investigations of the garment industry, so persistent her lobbying for wage and hour reform, that Alfred E. Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt recruited Perkins to work within the government.

In each case, no conjunction links the blue portion to the green portion.
Instead, the two portions are connected only by a comma.

OA: Satre had an opinion on everything, painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed.
Here, the omission of a conjunction between the blue portion and the green portion is another example of asyndeton.

Advice:
If the only issue in an answer choice is a list of parallel forms without a conjunction, hold onto the answer choice.
Eliminate it only if an alternate answer choice avoids the conjunction issue and is free of errors.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 10 Jul 2025
Posts: 16,101
Own Kudos:
74,240
 [1]
Given Kudos: 475
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,101
Kudos: 74,240
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
BillyZ
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed.

(A) often changed
(B) and it was usually changed
(C) that was often changed
(D) changing often
(E) one he often changed

SC56561.01

https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,924058-2,00.html

This inadvertent guru had an opinion on everything, painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed. But for most of his life he was convinced of the ineluctable corruption of the bourgeoisie, even though he was to the bourgeoisie born. His father was a naval officer who sickened and died when Jean-Paul was only two. The boy was brought up in the house of his grandfather, a linguistics professor who doted on him. His prim Roman Catholic mother he loved but did not respect, because nobody else in his free-thinking Lutheran grandfather's household did ("My mother and I were the same age," Sartre later recalled).


Responding to a pm:

No issues in this question. Option (A) is absolutely correct. It is an acceptable writing style. The "rules" that test-takers often like to rely on may not prepare them for such situations. Hence, reading high quality material is absolutely non negotiable.

This style is used to add some drama such as ... a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
At times it is also used for emphasis.

Parallelism shows you that all other options are incorrect.
User avatar
Logo
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 07 May 2020
Last visit: 07 May 2021
Posts: 56
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 32
Location: United States
Schools: LBS '23 (A)
GRE 1: Q165 V159
GPA: 3.85
Products:
Schools: LBS '23 (A)
GRE 1: Q165 V159
Posts: 56
Kudos: 23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I really struggle with finding the meaning in this sentence. How are we supposed to know that "painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed." refers to Sarte's opinion? From my perspective, "painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed." refers to Sarte him/herself?!

Please help! My brain hurts!
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,372
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Logo
I really struggle with finding the meaning in this sentence. How are we supposed to know that "painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed." refers to Sarte's opinion? From my perspective, "painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed." refers to Sarte him/herself?!

Please help! My brain hurts!
Hello, Logo. Speaking of meaning, it would not make sense to say that a person, any person, was considered in this context. Someone can be considered for a position, for instance, but that is not how the word is being used here—there is no unseen agent making such a consideration. Neither does it make sense to call a person reasoned. (He reasoned that... would turn the word into a verb.) Finally, Sartre could be a changed man, for instance, but there is no earlier information to indicate as much—Sartre... often changed in what way? No, the grammar tells us that these action words are all being used as modifiers, so changed is an adjective, not a verb, and if we ask ourselves what could logically be considered, reasoned, and changed within the sentence, only the word opinion stands out. Such modifiers, those that take a verb stem and change it into -ing or -ed form, often modify the preceding noun, although there can be exceptions, as we see here, in which the noun prior to the object of a preposition is modified instead—i.e. the opinion, not everything, is, for example, elaborately reasoned.

So, from both a grammatical and a semantic standpoint, the modifiers belong to opinion. If you were unsure about what needed to fill in the underlined portion, you could at least consider that the two phrases prior to it follow a similar construct (adverb, adjective) and appear to be the first two parts of a list. The GMAT™ strongly favors parallelism, and a third adverb-adjective phrase would fit the bill perfectly. With all of this said, the question is advanced, so if these concepts are unfamiliar to you, you could always practice easier material and work up to these more challenging questions.

I hope that helps with your concerns on this one. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts