GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 21 Oct 2019, 00:37

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

Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2861
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Sep 2016, 09:59
1
iMyself wrote:
macjas wrote:
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"-at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

A at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers
B that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers
C that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced
D some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced
E some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,

In the question, I can't understand WHY A is wrong? In A, didn't 'event' modify '' greatly reducing their numbers''?
In B, their indicates what? does it indicate ''anthropologists'', "people" or "ancestors
also, HOW an 'event' greatly reduced their number?
If I say:
They killed their father. [/i] Here, their is the pronoun of they. So, in the sentence B, .....event reduced their number. Here, their is plural but event is singular. I should not say that He killed their father. How the sentence matched its pronoun in B?
Thanks...


1. Following is the official explanation for A:
The omission of that after the dash makes the function of the final clause unclear. The structure makes that clause appear to be an awkward and rhetorically puzzling separate assertion that the writer has appended to the prior claim about what the anthropologists believe. The agent or cause of reducing is unclear.

2. I do not understand your query "HOW an 'event' greatly reduced their number?" Why do you think that an event cannot reduce their number?

3. This query is also not clear - why do you consider that " He killed their father" is not correct? Why only "they" can kill their father and a single person (or a single event) can't?
IIMA, IIMC School Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1366
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
CAT Tests
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2017, 23:31
Hi GMATNinja generis GMATNinjaTwo

Can you help to differentiate between function of a hyphen and semicolon?
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Feeling stressed, you are not alone!!
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2867
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jan 2018, 21:29
2
adkikani wrote:
Hi GMATNinja generis GMATNinjaTwo

Can you help to differentiate between function of a hyphen and semicolon?



Hello Arpit @adikikani,

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


To begin with, this official sentence uses a dash and not a hyphen.

Now generally, both hyphens and semi-colons are used to connect two independent clauses.

However, in the correct answer choice of this official question, the hyphen is followed by a dependent clause.

Personally, I see this usage just as an exception to the rule, an atypical usage in a one-off case.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 42
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2018, 10:11
egmat

1. I understand that "that" is needed after the "-" in order to maintain the parallelism between " that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck" and "that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event" as the portion after the "-" simply elaborates the portion before "-" and adds some more information. Please tell me if my understanding is correct.

2. However, please explain why is ", greatly reducing their numbers" wrong as I understand that ",-ing" modifies the preceeding clause and either presents the result of the action done in the preceeding clause or describes how the action is being done in the preceeding clause. Here, we can see that "greatly reducing their numbers" clearly presents the result of "past our ancestors suffered an event". Please explain
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2867
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Apr 2018, 15:16
2
1
aviejay wrote:
egmat

1. I understand that "that" is needed after the "-" in order to maintain the parallelism between " that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck" and "that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event" as the portion after the "-" simply elaborates the portion before "-" and adds some more information. Please tell me if my understanding is correct.

2. However, please explain why is ", greatly reducing their numbers" wrong as I understand that ",-ing" modifies the preceeding clause and either presents the result of the action done in the preceeding clause or describes how the action is being done in the preceeding clause. Here, we can see that "greatly reducing their numbers" clearly presents the result of "past our ancestors suffered an event". Please explain



Hello aviejay,

Thank you for the query and the PM. :-)


1. Yes, your understanding is correct.

2. It is true that the comma + verb-ing modifier presents either the how aspect or the result of the modified action. However, in modifying the preceding action, the comma + verb-ing modifier must also make sense with the doer of the modified action.

You are correct in saying that that comma + verb-ing modifier reducing seems to present the result of the action suffered. But, comma + reducing fails to make sense with doer - our ancestors - of the modified action.

Choice A seems to suggest that our ancestors suffered an event and as a result reduced their numbers. This meaning is certainly not logical.

From the context of the sentence, we know that the event that our ancestors suffered reduced their numbers.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2402
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Oct 2018, 21:36
macjas wrote:
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers -- Can we reject this option because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers

(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced -- usage of so that

(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced - we need a preposition with some time ; “from which” construction stands for “their numbers were greatly reduced from the event”. Clearly, the numbers were reduced not FROM the event but BY the event.

In general, “sometime” means “at some point”, and “some time” means “a period of time”.

(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly, - we need a preposition with some time ; “so as to” indicates purpose. This option illogically means that the ancestors suffered with an intention to reduce their numbers.


1. Is the punctuation that follows the phrase "population bottleneck" is a hyphen or a dash? Can you list uses of both of them?

2. Can we reject option A because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

3. In option A, DOES verb-ing modifier need to make sense with the subject of the preceding clauses our ancestors?

At some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation. -- here verb-ing modifier reducing does explain the entire action of preceding clause but does not make sense with the subject.

I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs---> here I did not directly scare the dogs but my action of dropping the bags did.

As per the official question in the following link -

https://gmatclub.com/forum/between-14-0 ... l#p1868115

Between 14,000 and 8,000 b.c. the ice cap that covered northern Asia, Europe, and America began to melt, uncovering vast new areas that were to be occupied by migrating peoples moving northward.

An observation from this question is that the verb-ing ‘uncovering’ does not make sense with the subject ‘ice cap’: ice cap didn’t do the action of ‘uncovering’. ‘Uncovering of the areas’ happened on its own as a direct consequence of ‘melting’. Thus, we can learn from this question that in ‘comma+verb-ing structure’, verb-ing doesn’t need to always make sense with the subject as long as it provides a direct consequence of the action of the clause.

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , VeritasPrepBrian, GMATGuruNY , VeritasKarishma , DmitryFarber , RonPurewal , ChiranjeevSingh , other experts - please enlighten
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 569
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2018, 12:19
3
Hello Everyone!

While it seems that the original question came with a pretty thorough explanation, let's see if we can figure out how you would tackle this question if you found in on the GMAT! To get started, let's look at the original question, and highlight any major differences in orange:

Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers
(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers
(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced
(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced
(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,

After a quick glance over the options, there are a couple things we can focus on:

1. at some time / that at some time / that sometime / some time
2. Their endings (intended meaning)


Let's start by taking a closer look at #1 on our list: how to begin! We know that the phrase starts directly after an em dash, so we need to follow the rules concerning em dashes. In this sentence, the em dash is used to show that what follows is a more detailed explanation of a "population bottleneck." You could replace the em dash with the phrase "in other words" and it should still make sense because both the original explanation and the "rewording" of it should be parallel:

Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers
(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers
(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced
(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced
(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,

We can eliminate options A, D, & E because they don't have the word "that" to create a parallel structure to the original explanation.

Now that we only have 2 options to choose from, let's add in the rest of the sentence and check for other problems:

(B) Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

This is CORRECT! It uses parallel wording by starting both explanations with the word "that." It also uses parallel structure to list the two things that were greatly reduced: their numbers / our genetic variation. It uses the structure "greatly reduced X and Y," where X and Y were both written using parallel structure (pronoun + noun).

(C) Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced and thus our genetic variation.

This is INCORRECT! While it does use parallelism to start both explanations with "that," there is a parallelism problem later on:

their numbers were greatly reduced and thus our genetic variation = X was greatly reduced and Y = NOT PARALLEL

To fix it, we would have to repeat the verb:

their numbers were greatly reduced and thus our genetic variation was greatly reduced = X was greatly reduced and Y was greatly reduced = PARALLEL

There you have it - option B is the correct choice because it uses parallel structure throughout the sentence!


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.
_________________
"Students study. GMAT assassins train."
Image


The Course Used By GMAT Club Moderators To Earn 750+

souvik101990 Score: 760 Q50 V42 ★★★★★
ENGRTOMBA2018 Score: 750 Q49 V44 ★★★★★
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 24 Sep 2018
Posts: 99
Location: India
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2019, 17:32
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.


(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers:

Reducing : Is the action is still continuing (NO). So this is wrong. it reduced long back.

(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers

Correct answer: That (refer to the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck")
2. suffered an event that greatly: So the event that is greatly reduces the number

(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced

so that their numbers were greatly: using of so that is wrong. No one forcibly reduced the number. As one event happened which reduced the number. So WRONG

(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced

their numbers were greatly reduced: seems like someone reduced their number.WRONG

(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,

so as to reduce their numbers greatly,: It seems like the ancestors only reduced their number. WRONG
_________________
Thanks,
Bijaya

If this post is helpful for you please press the kudos button
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Posts: 21
Reviews Badge
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Aug 2019, 04:51
Skywalker18 wrote:
macjas wrote:
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers -- Can we reject this option because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers

(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced -- usage of so that

(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced - we need a preposition with some time ; “from which” construction stands for “their numbers were greatly reduced from the event”. Clearly, the numbers were reduced not FROM the event but BY the event.

In general, “sometime” means “at some point”, and “some time” means “a period of time”.

(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly, - we need a preposition with some time ; “so as to” indicates purpose. This option illogically means that the ancestors suffered with an intention to reduce their numbers.


1. Is the punctuation that follows the phrase "population bottleneck" is a hyphen or a dash? Can you list uses of both of them?

2. Can we reject option A because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

3. In option A, DOES verb-ing modifier need to make sense with the subject of the preceding clauses our ancestors?

At some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation. -- here verb-ing modifier reducing does explain the entire action of preceding clause but does not make sense with the subject.

I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs---> here I did not directly scare the dogs but my action of dropping the bags did.

As per the official question in the following link -

https://gmatclub.com/forum/between-14-0 ... l#p1868115

Between 14,000 and 8,000 b.c. the ice cap that covered northern Asia, Europe, and America began to melt, uncovering vast new areas that were to be occupied by migrating peoples moving northward.

An observation from this question is that the verb-ing ‘uncovering’ does not make sense with the subject ‘ice cap’: ice cap didn’t do the action of ‘uncovering’. ‘Uncovering of the areas’ happened on its own as a direct consequence of ‘melting’. Thus, we can learn from this question that in ‘comma+verb-ing structure’, verb-ing doesn’t need to always make sense with the subject as long as it provides a direct consequence of the action of the clause.

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , VeritasPrepBrian, GMATGuruNY , VeritasKarishma , DmitryFarber , RonPurewal , ChiranjeevSingh , other experts - please enlighten


Dear egmat GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , VeritasPrepBrian, GMATGuruNY , VeritasKarishma , DmitryFarber , RonPurewal , ChiranjeevSingh please enlighten
_________________
"If a street performer makes you stop walking, you owe him a buck"
"If this post helped you on your GMAT journey, drop a +1 Kudo "
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Sep 2018
Posts: 4
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Aug 2019, 07:40
hazelnut wrote:
macjas wrote:
The Official Guide for GMAT Review 2017

Practice Question
Question No.: SC 736
Page: 695

Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

A at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers
B that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers
C that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced
D some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced
E some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly,


From which source is this answer, please?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Posts: 48
GMAT 1: 610 Q46 V28
Re: Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2019, 07:42
Deadpool3 wrote:
Skywalker18 wrote:
macjas wrote:
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in the world's people is the result of a "population bottleneck"—at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation.

(A) at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers -- Can we reject this option because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

(B) that at some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event that greatly reduced their numbers

(C) that sometime in the past our ancestors suffered an event so that their numbers were greatly reduced -- usage of so that

(D) some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event from which their numbers were greatly reduced - we need a preposition with some time ; “from which” construction stands for “their numbers were greatly reduced from the event”. Clearly, the numbers were reduced not FROM the event but BY the event.

In general, “sometime” means “at some point”, and “some time” means “a period of time”.

(E) some time in the past, that our ancestors suffered an event so as to reduce their numbers greatly, - we need a preposition with some time ; “so as to” indicates purpose. This option illogically means that the ancestors suffered with an intention to reduce their numbers.


1. Is the punctuation that follows the phrase "population bottleneck" is a hyphen or a dash? Can you list uses of both of them?

2. Can we reject option A because we are joining 2 independent clauses using — ?

3. In option A, DOES verb-ing modifier need to make sense with the subject of the preceding clauses our ancestors?

At some time in the past our ancestors suffered an event, greatly reducing their numbers and thus our genetic variation. -- here verb-ing modifier reducing does explain the entire action of preceding clause but does not make sense with the subject.

I dropped the bags onto the floor, scaring the dogs---> here I did not directly scare the dogs but my action of dropping the bags did.

As per the official question in the following link -

https://gmatclub.com/forum/between-14-0 ... l#p1868115

Between 14,000 and 8,000 b.c. the ice cap that covered northern Asia, Europe, and America began to melt, uncovering vast new areas that were to be occupied by migrating peoples moving northward.

An observation from this question is that the verb-ing ‘uncovering’ does not make sense with the subject ‘ice cap’: ice cap didn’t do the action of ‘uncovering’. ‘Uncovering of the areas’ happened on its own as a direct consequence of ‘melting’. Thus, we can learn from this question that in ‘comma+verb-ing structure’, verb-ing doesn’t need to always make sense with the subject as long as it provides a direct consequence of the action of the clause.

AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , VeritasPrepBrian, GMATGuruNY , VeritasKarishma , DmitryFarber , RonPurewal , ChiranjeevSingh , other experts - please enlighten


Dear egmat GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , VeritasPrepBrian, GMATGuruNY , VeritasKarishma , DmitryFarber , RonPurewal , ChiranjeevSingh please enlighten


Hi GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma

If you can please help with the Skywalker18's above questions, specifically question 2,

Can we reject option A because we are joining 2 independent clauses using —(dash) ?

Also, I understand that in option 'A', it does not makes sense that the doer of the actions, 'suffered an event' and 'greatly reducing their numbers', is 'our ancestors' even though the 2nd action is clearly a result of the first.

Please correct me if I am wrong

Thanks
Saurabh
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 3051
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2019, 10:45
1
Sarjaria84 wrote:
Hi GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma

If you can please help with the Skywalker18's above questions, specifically question 2,

Can we reject option A because we are joining 2 independent clauses using —(dash) ?

Also, I understand that in option 'A', it does not makes sense that the doer of the actions, 'suffered an event' and 'greatly reducing their numbers', is 'our ancestors' even though the 2nd action is clearly a result of the first.

Please correct me if I am wrong

Thanks
Saurabh
Hi Sarjaria84,

Although some people feel that a dash should not be used to join two independent clauses, I don't think we should regard that as a (reliable) rule. The GMAT doesn't really test punctuation all that much, so we'd be taking a risk if we were to apply something like that.

We could instead remove A because it drops the that that is supposed to describe ("limit") an event:
... our ancestors suffered an event... ← This doesn't make any sense. What kind of event? We would never say something like "they suffered an event" and end the sentence there, without adding anything to event.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in   [#permalink] 22 Sep 2019, 10:45

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 32 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Some anthropologists believe that the genetic homogeneity evident in

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne