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

An adept understanding of the structural construction of sentences can help in solving this seemingly jumble of modifiers, list parallelism, and punctuations. This problem is about a list of three nouns namely mindfulness, humanity, and self-kindness followed by their respective modifiers.

The algorithm for doing this problem may start with:

1. 'without being carried away' in the non-underlined part indicates that the second arm of that phrase should have another 'ing' form after the conjunction 'or'. We can safely remove B and E on this count.

2. There is no need to put a comma before 'or' in C since it might give a wrong feeling that what follows 'or' could be another item in the list. In addition, a comma is not required when only two items are involved in a given list.

3. Between A and D: In A, "empathy with the suffering of others" is just a modifier and we do not join a modifier with its modifyee by a conjunction, but only by a comma.

Therefore, D is the answer.

There are two ways we can use a semicolon. First, we can use it to separate independent clauses. That's the usage we see most often.

But we can also use semi-colons to separate elements in a list when there are commas within those elements. For example:

"During his exotic vacation in the tri-state area, Mike visited tourist hotspots such as Trenton, New Jersey; Rochester, New York; and Hamden, Connecticut."

Notice that if I'd separated the cities with commas, it would have been very difficult for the reader to tell when one element ended and the next began.

Same usage here. Here's the relevant portion of (D):


Notice there are three elements in this list and that each element contains a comma setting off a modifier within it:

(1) mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them
(2) common humanity, an empathy with the suffering of others
(3) and self-kindness, a recognition of your own suffering

Again, if we separated the elements with commas, it would be very difficult to tell where one ended and the next began.

A similar official example can be found here, and an excessive rant about GMAT punctuation can be found in this video.

I hope that helps!

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that mindfulness is the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them, and common humanity is an empathy with the suffering of others.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Parallelism + Grammatical Construction + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• Any elements linked by conjunction (“or” in this case) must be parallel.
• Semicolons are used to join the elements of a compound list – a list whose individual elements also contain commas.
• If a list contains only two elements, they must be joined by a conjunction; the "comma + and construction" (oxford comma) is used for the last element in a list of three or more elements.
• In a “noun + comma + phrase” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses commas to join the elements of a compound list; remember, semicolons are used to join the elements of a compound list – a list whose individual elements also contain commas. Further, Option A uses the needlessly wordy phrase “or empathy with the suffering of others”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy; this usage is redundant, as “or” can be deleted without a loss of clarity.

B: This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between “being carried away” and “repression of them”; remember, any elements linked by conjunction (“or” in this case) must be parallel. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the “comma + conjunction (“or” in this case)” construction to join two elements in a list - “being evasive” and "repression" of them”; remember, if a list has only two elements, they must be joined with a conjunction. Further, Option B incorrectly uses the “comma + conjunction (“and” in this case)” construction to link the first and second elements in a list of three elements – “mindfulness…common humanity...and self-kindness”; remember, the "comma + and construction" (oxford comma) is used for the last element in a list of three or more elements, and commas are used to join the other elements. Additionally, Option B incorrectly uses commas to join the elements of a compound list; remember, semicolons are used to join the elements of a compound list – a list whose individual elements also contain commas. Besides, Option B uses the needlessly wordy phrase “or empathy with the suffering of others”, leading to awkwardness and redundancy; this usage is redundant, as “or” can be deleted without a loss of clarity.

C: This answer choice incorrectly uses the “comma + conjunction (“or” in this case)” construction to join two elements in a list - “being carried away” and “repressing them”; remember, if a list has only two elements, they must be joined with a conjunction. Further, Option C incorrectly uses a comma to join two elements in a compound list; remember, semicolons are used to join the elements of a compound list – a list whose individual elements also contain commas.

D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase “repressing them”, conveying the intended meaning – that mindfulness is the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them. Moreover, Option D correctly modifies “common humanity” with the appositive phrase “an empathy with the suffering of others”, conveying the intended meaning – that common humanity is an empathy with the suffering of others. Further, Option D correctly uses semicolons to join the elements of a compound list - a list whose individual elements also contain commas. Additionally, Option D correctly uses conjunction (“or” in this case) to join two elements in a list - “being carried away” and “repressing them”, maintaining parallelism between the elements linked by the conjunction. Moreover, Option D correctly uses a comma to link the first and second elements in a list of three elements – “mindfulness…common humanity...and self-kindness”. Besides, Option D is free of awkwardness or redundancy.

E: This answer choice incorrectly modifies “common humanity” with the infinitive verb form (“to + base form of verb” – “to + empathize” in this sentence), leading to an incoherent meaning; the intended meaning is that common humanity is an empathy with the suffering of others; remember, in a “noun + comma + phrase” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Moreover, Option E further alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “repress them”; the construction of this phrase produces an incoherent meaning; the intended meaning is that mindfulness is the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Phrase Comma Subject" and "Subject Comma Phrase" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the use of punctuations on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~10 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

To answer this question, we require to find parallel items,

The parallel items are
mindfulness, ...A
common humanity...B
self-kindness...C

Also, the phrases, x, y and z after each of the parallel items are noun modifier describing about that item,,,
so the correct way is

Self-compassion is made up of A, x.....; B, y.... ; and C, z....
away or repressing them are parallel to each other and require or in between.

D

Hello jamalabdullah100!

Here is an easy way to figure out if you're dealing with a simple list or a compound list:

Simple List = each item in the list is simply written and doesn't contain any punctuation --> each item is separated by a comma
Compound List = each item in the list is complex and contains a comma or other punctuation --> each item is separated by a semicolon

For simple lists, each item doesn't contain any punctuation, so separating them with commas is clear enough:

I went to the grocery store to buy marshmallows, chocolate bars, and graham crackers to make s'mores.

For compound lists, each item contains some kind of punctuation. Separating each item with a comma would be confusing, so using a semicolon is a clearer way of telling readers what items go where:

Over the past 10 years, I have lived in Phoenix, AZ; Detroit, MI; Seattle, WA; and Miami, FL.

Each item in the list above is a city and state. Separating them with commas would be confusing - it would say you've lived in Phoenix AND Arizona, instead of saying you've lived in Phoenix, Arizona. Using semicolons makes it clear that you're listing cities and states together.

When we look at the correct option, we can clearly determine what each of the items is:

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

If we don't separate each item with a semicolon, we might accidentally assume that "mindfulness" and "the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them" are two different things. Instead, we can clearly see that those two items go together (a term + its definition), and that all the other items in the list are set up the same way.

So remember - if each item in the list contains its own punctuation, it's a compound list. If each item doesn't contain its own punctuation, it's a simple list!

I hope that helps!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I hope that helps!

Don't overcomplicate things!

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

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

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

I hope that clears things up!

Thanks for the question altairahmad!

It sounds like the others have done a great job of explaining things already, but we did want to add one last thing: it IS possible to say "a kindness" in English and have it be grammatically correct. We don't use it very often, mainly because it's an old-fashioned way of speaking or writing. Saying "a kindness" or "an empathy" means to commit a specific act of kindness or empathy, rather than just being kind or empathetic in general. Whenever you see "a kindness" or "an empathy," it is typically followed up by a quick description of what that specific kind of kindness or empathy entails - much like the sentence we're dealing with here!

I hope that helps! As long as you were able to focus on the grammatical issues here (mainly parallelism and punctuation of compound lists), you should have arrived at the correct answer without needing to worry about this.

As always, feel free to tag us at EMPOWERgmatVerbal if you have any other questions!

No worries, himanshu0123. Out of respect for other Experts, I like to let them follow up on queries that pertain to their own posts, rather than jumping in on their behalf (unless I know that that person is no longer active on the site). Regarding your hypothetical sentence, it is functional, even if I would expect to see tighter parallelism in an official SC question. Remember, and I will almost certainly echo GMATNinja here, SC is not about asking what is possible, but about assessing the five options you are presented within the context of that sentence and seeking a grammatically sound iteration that also happens to be clear and concise. There are many moving parts, and worrying about covering all bases would ultimately prove counterproductive to your studies. If you do come across an official SC sentence in which the OA seems to break some rule, that is the time to revise your understanding and ask for help as needed. (I cannot think of any questions off the top of my head that hold a relative clause and a modifying phrase in parallel, but I am open to that possibility.)

- Andrew

Hey M838TE,

Happy to help you with this.

The quick answer to your question is "NO. The ability to manage...or to repress..." (as in choice E) is UNACCEPTABLE".

Here's why:

You need to understand that you are wrong, not from a grammatical standpoint but from a LOGICAL one. Now, we've said this so many times before and continue to say it now, "you must derive the intended meaning of the sentence BEFORE wrangling with grammatical correctness." The only way to figure out whether a grammatical structure is acceptable is to first know clearly what the author wishes to say. Let's understand:

1. Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them.
2. Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or to repress them.
3. Self-compassion is made up of mindfulness, the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repress them.

Each of the above is GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT. Now, although it can be argued that sentence 2 above is slightly better than sentence 3 (grammatically), sentence 3 isn't exactly grammatically incorrect. The reason is that "repress" has only one other parallel verb: "manage". So, although sentence 2 is slightly easier to comprehend, sentence 3 isn't technically, grammatically wrong.

However, both sentences 2 and 3 fail to convey the INTENDED MEANING of the author. Just ask yourself, "what is the meaning of "mindfulness" as per the author?".

Mindfulness is

• The ability to manage thoughts and emotions
  
  • without being carried away or
  • without repressing those emotions

Mindfulness is NOT the ability to repress thoughts and emotions. This is the OPPOSITE of the intended meaning. If you're repressing thoughts and emotions, you're not really being "MINDFUL", are you?

So, to conclude, you are right about the grammatical concept. What you're faltering at is Logical Thinking and deriving the Intended Meaning.

I hope this helps improve your understanding. Please feel free to revert if you still have questions.

Happy Learning!

Abhishek

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

An initial look suggests that the sentence consists of few things - how many - that needs to be checked. First non-underlined part has 'mindfulness' with an explanation(usage of the ability suggests it is an explanation of mindfulness) then the underlined part has 'common humanity' and 'empathy with the suffering of others' may be two things because of usage of 'or' and finally the non-underlined part in the end 'self-kindness' again explained(usage of 'a recognition' after 'self-kindness' suggests it's an explanation).
So, two non-underlined parts has similar structure suggesting that its a list where parallelism must exist with similar structure in the underlined part. Hence the original sentence is wrong though 'being' and 'repressing' part is fine.

(A) away or repressing them, common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others, - WRONG. As discussed above.
(B) away, or repression of them, and common humanity, or empathy with the suffering of others, - WRONG. 'being' in the non-underlined part is not parallel to noun 'repression of' as it's a modifier. Also using 'or' here repeats the same error of option 'A'
(C) away, or repressing them, common humanity, empathy with the suffering of others; - WRONG. Though in this option the underlined part comes close to non-underlined part structure-wise, 'common ... others' looks like two things one a noun and other a clause. But this doesn't make sense on parallelism front, not-to-mention that semicolon also suggests that the part 'common ... others' does not fit in the first part of sentence.
(D) away or repressing them; common humanity, an empathy with the suffering of others; - CORRECT. 'Being' and 'repressing' are parallel. In 'common ... others' using 'an empathy', a noun + noun modifier, suggests it is explaining common humanity. Two semicolons properly list down three things in the list with all of them having similar structure.
(E) away or repress them; common humanity, to empathize with the suffering of others - WRONG. Three things are wrong here. First, 'Being' and 'repress' are not parallel. Second, 'common ... others' and rest of the sentence does not make sense as IC. Third, no element is parallel.

Answer (D).

Experts, am i correct in saying that the three things listed are explained using noun + noun modifiers??
Otherwise, are my explanation correct.?

Thanks.!!

lnm87 , you are correct. The prose in this answer is a bit hard to follow, but the analysis is very good.

Yes.
I added one detail: being carried away is an ___ING phrase—a verbal noun. Repression is also a noun but repression is not a verbal noun. They are not parallel for that reason.
See here.

Nice work.

Its encouraging to see your reply.

After attempting the question offline I checked it here. Was not that confident during marking the answer since it took me more than 4 minutes. But loved the solution from EMPOWERgmatVerbal

is the best part.

"TAKEAWAY"..

Hi Bambi2021, one application of semi-colon obviously is that it is used to connect two Independent clauses.

Consider this as another application of semi-colon: to connect various elements in a list, when each element has further sub-elements.

The correct option here is:

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

Because of the use of semi-colons, there is a clear demarcation of various elements and sub-elements (within each element):

i) Element-1: mindfulness; sub-element-1: an appositive describing Element-1 - the ability to manage thoughts and emotions without being carried away or repressing them

ii) Element-2: common humanity; sub-element-2: an appositive describing Element-2 - an empathy with the suffering of others

iii) Element-3: self-kindness; sub-element-3: an appositive describing Element-3 - a recognition of your own suffering and a commitment to solving the problem

Now, in this correct option, let us see what happens if the sentence had used commas instead of semi-colons:

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

Notice how confusing the above sentence is, because all we see is an almost infinite series of commas, making it extremely difficult for us to make sense of how each element and sub-element is demarcated. The use of semi-colons neatly solves this interpretation conundrum.

Another similar official question that comes to my mind:

First discovered more than 30 years ago, Lina's sunbird, a four-and-a-half-inch animal found in the Philippines and resembling a hummingbird, has shimmering metallic colors on its head; a brilliant orange patch, bordered with red tufts, in the center of its breast; and a red eye.

Again, notice a similar use of semi-colons in the above sentence.

Hi Anshul.

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

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

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

MartyTargetTestPrep

Thank you, Marty! It did help!

It wouldn't make sense to describe "mindfulness" as "the ability to repress thoughts and emotions" -- mindfulness is the ability to manage thoughts and emotions WITHOUT repressing them.

So, yes, you could argue that the parallelism in (E) is grammatically okay. But the parallelism creates an illogical meaning, and that's not great.



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

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

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

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

I hope that helps!