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

It is currently 06 Dec 2019, 13:32

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

Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Posts: 19
Reviews Badge
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2016, 08:32
Obviously, but can you explain why or break down the parts of speech to show that it's so?

Posted from my mobile device
Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2849
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2016, 10:32
1
wmichaelxie wrote:
Obviously, but can you explain why or break down the parts of speech to show that it's so?

Posted from my mobile device


The structure is X compared with Y.
Here,
X = managers
Y = managers
Hence there is no problem with parallelism.

There is a relative clause modifier for X and another relative clause modifier for Y. It is not required that these modifiers also be parallel.

(Though they do not require to be, these modifiers here are parallel because both of them are relative clauses - it is not required to analyze the parts of speech to judge parallelism between two relative clauses.)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4471
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Oct 2016, 12:06
2
wmichaelxie wrote:
Obviously, but can you explain why or break down the parts of speech to show that it's so?

Dear wmichaelxie,

I see that my brilliant colleague sayantanc2k already responded, but I would like to add a few words as well. :-)

Many students have the misapprehension that parallelism is essentially a grammatical construction. It's not. Parallelism is essentially a logical construction, and the grammar simply has to make clear the logic. Students with this misconception imagine that parallelism requires a detailed patterns of matching in lockstep precision, and that simply isn't the case. We only have to match enough of the grammar to make the logical pattern unambiguously clear.

Here's the OA, version (E):
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual environment has a markedly positive effect on managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language, as compared with managers whose colleagues are native English speakers.
The "those" in other choices introduce possible ambiguity. There is a clear logical pattern of matching. It doesn't matter at all that the verb following "colleagues" is different.

The GMAT SC has a way of punishing students who pay attention only to grammar. On the GMAT SC, grammar and logic and rhetoric are all equally important.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep


Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 3
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2018, 04:07
Can egmat please comment on the correct usage of "as compared with" in this example?
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 02 Jan 2019
Posts: 23
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Feb 2019, 07:16
kanigmat011 wrote:
Ain't as compared with incorrect usage of idiom


Both the idioms are correct.
You can also refer to this article by oxford.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/compare-with-or-compare-to

Vercules Do you know any OG or GMAT Prep questions of such sort?
If yes , with be thankful if you share the same.
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 14 Aug 2017
Posts: 43
Location: India
Concentration: Other, General Management
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
CAT Tests
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2019, 08:02
mikemcgarry wrote:
fameatop wrote:
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual environment has a markedly positive effect on managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language, as compared to those whose native language is English.
D) to managers whose colleagues do not.- CORRECT as this option avoids ambiguity by using MANAGERS instead of THOSE: moreover, correct use of verb form "DO NOT"
E) with managers whose colleagues are native English speakers- Avoid ambiguity but the option fails to maintain parallelism between
managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language
managers whose colleagues are native English speakers


Fame

Dear Fame,
This is in response to your private message.

First of all, in my mind, both (D) & (E) show clear and correct parallelism, and the problem with (D) is the grave logical issue that Vercules pointed out. In my mind, Vercules has already resolved all the issues pertaining to this question, but because you asked, I will elaborate a bit.

Point #1----LOGIC always trumps GRAMMAR ---- there is no sense putting words in what would seem to be a grammatically correct order if what is said is illogical.

Point #2 --- parallelism is NOT purely mechanical --- it doesn't necessarily mean an exact plug-in verbal repeat. Parallelism operates at both the level of the word and at the level of logic. In that sense,
managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language
managers whose colleagues are native English speakers

these two, while having different wording, are precise logical parallels.

Point #3 ---- the word "NOT" can be very tricky.
In a binary category, the word "NOT" produces a precise meaning
... those who can ride a bike, compared to those who can not ....
... those who speak French, compared to those who don't ....
... those have read Moby Dick, compared to those who have not ....

For all three of those, there's a implied yes/no question that more or less exhausts the category of possibilities.

Now, by contrast ....
.... those whose favorite novel is Moby Dick, compared to ????
....those who play cello, compared to ????

Here, the nature of the comparison is a bit less clear ---- do we mean to compare all those whose favorite novel is Moby Dick with the vast majority of humanity who do not have this relationship with this one particular book? or do we mean to compare those whose favorite novel is Moby Dick with those whose favorite is some other work?
Similarly, in the second, are we really comparing all cello-players to all non-cello-players? Or are we comparing those who play the cello to those who play some other orchestral instrument?
The logic of the sentence would tell us a lot about how we had to frame the comparison, but the point is --- as soon as there are more than two possibilities, we can't just stick the word "NOT" in there and consider ourselves done.

In this question, choice (D) has .....
...has a markedly positive effect on managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language, as compared to managers whose colleagues do not.
I must say, this is a brilliantly constructed choice designed to snap all those who think about parallelism too mechanically, ignoring the underlying logic. I really like this question.
Here, category #1 = "managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language"
So the colleagues have this specific relationship with English --- they speak it as a second language.
Who would not be category #1 ----
(a) native speakers of English --- English as a "first" language
(b) folks who speak English as their third, fourth, fifth, etc. language
(c) those who do not speak a word of English
Now, logically, in the context of the sentence, do all those people have any business being lumped together? Of course not! Yes, strictly speaking, the word "NOT", indicated simply not in Category #1, would necessarily include all those people. It includes a much wider swathe of the human race than is intended by the sentence, and it's implications are utterly illogical. Once again, logic trumps grammar. This cannot be correct.

The best answer is (E) --- perfect logic, and perfect parallelism.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)



hi Mike between D and E split the distinction that i have come across to solve is the compared to and compared with logic,

compared with is used to compare similar objects that have some DIS-SIMILARITIES between them .
in options AB and C those is not clear is it referring to managers or to colleagues.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 May 2018
Posts: 53
Re: Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2019, 03:37
In A C and B, ‘those’ is ambiguous. It could mean ,manager or colleagues.

In E there is a //ism error between ‘speak English as a second language’ and ‘are native English speakers’.



So D is the correct choice.
Yale Moderator
avatar
S
Joined: 05 May 2019
Posts: 138
GPA: 3
CAT Tests
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Aug 2019, 08:30
fameatop wrote:
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual environment has a markedly positive effect on managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language, as compared to those whose native language is English.

E) with managers whose colleagues are native English speakers- Avoid ambiguity but the option fails to maintain parallelism between
managers whose colleagues speak English as a second language
managers whose colleagues are native English speakers


Thus the answer has to be D & it is definitely a 700+ level question



Fame


Hey mikemcgarry egmat daagh GMATNinja MikeScarn hazelnut generis Why did my friend here, think that E was wrong because of the parallelism? I made the same mistake at first too. Is it thaat verbs are always parallel irrespective of the verb construction? Kindly enlighten me.
GMAT Club Bot
Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env   [#permalink] 26 Aug 2019, 08:30

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 28 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Studies of performance reports show that working in a multilingual env

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





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