Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 11:07 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 11:07
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5   
User avatar
CRACKGMATNUT
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Last visit: 26 May 2024
Posts: 150
Own Kudos:
31
 [1]
Given Kudos: 30
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
Schools: Ivey '24 (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
Schools: Ivey '24 (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
Posts: 150
Kudos: 31
 [1]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 15 Jun 2021, 23:58
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is testing about back to back adjectives modifying the same noun.

The construct of such sentences is for eg: John had three big red cars. Three (number) big (what kind) red (what kind) all modifying cars.

Now if the question was Satre, an advent guru, had a painfully considered, elaborately reasoned, often changed opinion on everything, it would made much more sense as the construct is similar, all -ed modifiers( adjectives) getting modified by adverb and modifying opinion (noun). This construct has been altered by placing all modifiers apart in which *on everything* is part of prepositional phrase and all -ed modifier end up modifying opinion.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 148
Kudos: 32
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 07:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).
Show more
avatar
BankerBro
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 17 Oct 2020
Last visit: 23 Dec 2023
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
121
Given Kudos: 37
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: IIMA PGPX'23 (A) IIMB EPGP'23 (D) IIMC MBAEx'23 (D)
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V27
GMAT 2: 680 Q47 V37
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.3
WE:Corporate Finance (Retail Banking)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: IIMA PGPX'23 (A) IIMB EPGP'23 (D) IIMC MBAEx'23 (D)
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V35
Posts: 36
Kudos: 121
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 09:31
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is about pure parallelism and nothing else.
Kids who don't get into 'meaning' issues and sticks strongly to mechanical grammar rules get these kind of questions right.
Adverb (painfully) + adjective/past-participle (considered)
Adverb (elaborately) + adjective/past-participle (reasoned)
Adverb (often) + adjective/past-participle (changed)
.
For non-natives, delve into 'meaning' issues only when you cannot eliminate options as per grammar rules.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,886
 [1]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,886
 [1]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 09:47
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).
Show more


Hello adityaganjoo,

Although your question is not for me, here are my two cents anyway. ;)


In this rather "atypical" official question, the phrase "often changed" is also a modifier. The word "changed" is not a simple past tense verb here. It is a verb-ed noun modifier that, just like other preceding modifiers" modifies the noun "an opinion".

Test-takers often face difficulty in ascertaining whether the verb-ed word is a simple past tense verb or a noun modifier. Therefore, we write this article that helps one learn how to distinguish between the two. Please click on the link to read the detailed article: https://gmatclub.com/forum/ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 148
Kudos: 32
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 10:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).


Hello adityaganjoo,

Although your question is not for me, here are my two cents anyway. ;)


In this rather "atypical" official question, the phrase "often changed" is also a modifier. The word "changed" is not a simple past tense verb here. It is a verb-ed noun modifier that, just like other preceding modifiers" modifies the noun "an opinion".

Test-takers often face difficulty in ascertaining whether the verb-ed word is a simple past tense verb or a noun modifier. Therefore, we write this article that helps one learn how to distinguish between the two. Please click on the link to read the detailed article: https://gmatclub.com/forum/ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more

Thanks Shraddha! This helped! But seriously..... kya chl kya rha hai yeh!
The article on -ed modifiers looks helpful! I'll definitely go through it in the morning!

But the crux is, if all the modifiers are removed, this sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion which makes sense, right?
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,886
 [2]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,886
 [2]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 11:49
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
adityaganjoo

Thanks Shraddha! This helped! But seriously..... kya chl kya rha hai yeh!
The article on -ed modifiers looks helpful! I'll definitely go through it in the morning!

But the crux is, if all the modifiers are removed, this sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion which makes sense, right?
Show more



Hello adityaganjoo,

Thanks for the question. :-)


Well, at e-GMAT, we NEVER ask students to analyze sentences after getting rid of modifiers. I personally have this conviction that every single word used in an SC problem has a purpose. The purpose may be to introduce an error, but it has a purpose for being there.

Yes, modifiers present extra information. But just think about it. How much would we be able to communicate if we were to stick only to the subject, verbs, and objects? The modifiers add to the context of the sentence to present an idea in its entirety. They are used in a sentence to help us understand what the author wants to convey. Therefore, I just do not subscribe to this idea of eliminating entities from the sentence to understand the meaning. And I would advise you the same.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [2]
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: 5,080
 [2]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 21:34
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!
Show more
Hi adityaganjoo,

If we want to remove the first two modifiers and focus on only the third, we shouldn't remove the comma.

1. Sartre had an opinion on everything, often changed. ← The comma is important.

We can switch the position of the modifier so as to make it clear that it isn't referring to everything:

2. Sartre had an opinion, often changed, on everything. ← This is like saying "he had an opinion (often changed) on everything".
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 148
Kudos: 32
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 21:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AjiteshArun
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!
Hi adityaganjoo,

If we want to remove the first two modifiers and focus on only the third, we shouldn't remove the comma.

1. Sartre had an opinion on everything, often changed. ← The comma is important.

We can switch the position of the modifier so as to make it clear that it isn't referring to everything:

2. Sartre had an opinion, often changed, on everything. ← This is like saying "he had an opinion (often changed) on everything".
Show more

AjiteshArun Thanks! This makes it clearer. Could there be a case where there are three modifiers in series, and one of them modifies the other? I understand that this is how adverbs work, but how to identify such cases in adverbial clauses?
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 148
Kudos: 32
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 25 Jun 2021, 22:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
adityaganjoo

Thanks Shraddha! This helped! But seriously..... kya chl kya rha hai yeh!
The article on -ed modifiers looks helpful! I'll definitely go through it in the morning!

But the crux is, if all the modifiers are removed, this sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion which makes sense, right?



Hello adityaganjoo,

Thanks for the question. :-)


Well, at e-GMAT, we NEVER ask students to analyze sentences after getting rid of modifiers. I personally have this conviction that every single word used in an SC problem has a purpose. The purpose may be to introduce an error, but it has a purpose for being there.

Yes, modifiers present extra information. But just think about it. How much would we be able to communicate if we were to stick only to the subject, verbs, and objects? The modifiers add to the context of the sentence to present an idea in its entirety. They are used in a sentence to help us understand what the author wants to convey. Therefore, I just do not subscribe to this idea of eliminating entities from the sentence to understand the meaning. And I would advise you the same.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
Show more

egmat Hi Shraddha. While I completely agree with you on the point that each modifier has a purpose, I intend to get rid of them to identify the core structure of the sentence. With multiple bulky modifiers within a sentence, it sometimes gets overwhelming. Removing the modifiers has helped me identify the intended meaning and validate subject verb agreement, if not more. This is a personal observation!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,786
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,786
 [2]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 29 Jun 2021, 09:14
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).
Show more
"Often changed" is actually just another modifier in this construction! It is parallel to the other modifiers listed in the sentence. Sartre's opinion is described in three ways:

    1) painfully considered
    2) elaborately reasoned
    3) often changed.

If you remove all of the modifiers from the sentence, you end up with: "Sartre had an opinion on everything." This structure is just fine, and (A) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 148
Kudos: 32
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 29 Jun 2021, 19:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).
"Often changed" is actually just another modifier in this construction! It is parallel to the other modifiers listed in the sentence. Sartre's opinion is described in three ways:

    1) painfully considered
    2) elaborately reasoned
    3) often changed.

If you remove all of the modifiers from the sentence, you end up with: "Sartre had an opinion on everything." This structure is just fine, and (A) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!
Show more

Thanks a lot! This definitely helped!
User avatar
psurabhi
User avatar
Joined: 04 May 2016
Last visit: 15 Dec 2021
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
2
Posts: 8
Kudos: 2
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 30 Jun 2021, 01:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Experts,

I understand that the sentence is presenting three elements in the list, and hence all three elements must be parallel. However, the list should end with 'and'? Is this a requirement or good-to-have construction?

Thanks
Surabhi
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,786
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,786
 [1]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 20 Jul 2021, 06:38
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
psurabhi
Hi Experts,

I understand that the sentence is presenting three elements in the list, and hence all three elements must be parallel. However, the list should end with 'and'? Is this a requirement or good-to-have construction?

Thanks
Surabhi
Show more
Well, (A) is the correct answer here, so the GMAT is telling us that the "and" is not strictly required!

But, of course, this is not a typical construction. As explained nicely by AjiteshArun here, omitting the "and" gives the sentence a different style and feel. And before anybody asks: no, there are no simple rules dictating when it's okay to omit the "and"... sorry! ;)
avatar
mk96
avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2018
Last visit: 18 Sep 2022
Posts: 79
Own Kudos:
22
Given Kudos: 194
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: IIMA PGPX'22
GPA: 4
WE:Corporate Finance (Finance: Investment Banking)
Schools: IIMA PGPX'22
Posts: 79
Kudos: 22
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 21 Jul 2021, 14:58
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!
Show more

But where is the "and" connecting the list ? GMATNinja
User avatar
vv65
User avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
395
Given Kudos: 774
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 395
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 21 Jul 2021, 22:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mk96

But where is the "and" connecting the list ?
Show more
Obviously, there is no "AND".

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
kittle
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2021
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 318
Own Kudos:
161
Given Kudos: 618
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 318
Kudos: 161
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 23 Jul 2021, 06:09
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
adityaganjoo
GMATNinja If one removes all the modifiers, the sentence becomes: Sartre had an opinion on everything often changed. Is this construction correct? If not, how is (A) correct? Please help!

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

Show Spoiler
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).
"Often changed" is actually just another modifier in this construction! It is parallel to the other modifiers listed in the sentence. Sartre's opinion is described in three ways:

    1) painfully considered
    2) elaborately reasoned
    3) often changed.

If you remove all of the modifiers from the sentence, you end up with: "Sartre had an opinion on everything." This structure is just fine, and (A) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!
Show more

GMATNinja - please could you help me understand why are the modifiers not connected using a "connector" ? "AND" makes most sense here.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,786
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,786
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 29 Jul 2021, 06:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mk96
But where is the "and" connecting the list ? GMATNinja
Show more
Check out this post, if you haven't already. The "and" is not strictly required in certain contexts.
User avatar
AlwaysImproving
User avatar
Joined: 20 Nov 2020
Last visit: 03 Mar 2024
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 228
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Stern '25 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44 (Online)
GPA: 3.13
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Stern '25 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44 (Online)
Posts: 62
Kudos: 13
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 04 Aug 2021, 17:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In the correct OA [A], how can a correct list exist without the use of a parallelism marker?
User avatar
vv65
User avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
395
 [1]
Given Kudos: 774
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 395
 [1]
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 04 Aug 2021, 18:58
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
NareshGargMBA
In the correct OA [A], how can a correct list exist without the use of a parallelism marker?
Show more
A list is a series of names, words, or other items one after the other. (That is how dictionaries define 'list'.)

Most lists DO contain a conjunction (usually AND), but it is not strictly necessary. It is not the presence of a conjunction that makes something a list.

We can see the list in the sentence, can't we?
We don't need a parallelism marker to recognise that something is a list

Please read earlier posts in this thread
For instance, these posts (one was from me)
https://gmatclub.com/forum/sartre-an-in ... l#p2722059
https://gmatclub.com/forum/sartre-an-in ... l#p2722237

Posted from my mobile device
avatar
shrgmat
avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2020
Last visit: 25 Dec 2021
Posts: 44
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 82
Posts: 44
Kudos: 18
Sartre, an inadvertent guru, had an opinion on everything, painfully 10 Nov 2021, 11:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AyeeshaJ
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.

Isn't this ridiculous? Just to make the questions difficult, such odd writing styles are being tested.
Show more

Exactly; how can you miss AND GMAC?

Posted from my mobile device
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts