Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
AdityaHongunti
07 Nov 2018, 22:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
E. The auk not only exhibits a docile nature, not typically running from humans, but also provided delicious meat, as reputed by 19th century poachers,
mikemcgarry chetan2u daagh souvik101990
The reason i eliminated E is the usage of not only...but also
not only..but also ... provide a greater emphasis on the later part by saying - bla bla is not only X but also Y...here X may very well be important but Y too is important.. and somehow X and Y are relatable in "not only...but also" ...
here "exhibiting docile nature " and "providing meat" did not seem to be relatable and the usage of not only..but also, did not make much sense..
Am I right?? or there's no such thing ?? DmitryFarber VeritasPrepBrian
mikemcgarry chetan2u daagh souvik101990
The reason i eliminated E is the usage of not only...but also
not only..but also ... provide a greater emphasis on the later part by saying - bla bla is not only X but also Y...here X may very well be important but Y too is important.. and somehow X and Y are relatable in "not only...but also" ...
here "exhibiting docile nature " and "providing meat" did not seem to be relatable and the usage of not only..but also, did not make much sense..
Am I right?? or there's no such thing ?? DmitryFarber VeritasPrepBrian
07 Nov 2018, 23:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
As far as i know , we have to go by the meaning conveyed by the original sentence.
A) means Auk was driven to extinction by 3 things:
docile nature,
not running away from poachers
and
tasty meat
C is wrong because it changes tense ,that i understand but in D not running away is showing how auk has docile nature so now 2 things corresponded to its extinction:
docile nature and meat quality
So is not it change of meaning?
What if exhibits were exhibited in C?
A) means Auk was driven to extinction by 3 things:
docile nature,
not running away from poachers
and
tasty meat
C is wrong because it changes tense ,that i understand but in D not running away is showing how auk has docile nature so now 2 things corresponded to its extinction:
docile nature and meat quality
So is not it change of meaning?
What if exhibits were exhibited in C?
08 Nov 2018, 03:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
As long as E is rejected, it is ok, because the reason does not matter to GMAC. However, when Singapore is reachable in just two to three hours from India, would one like to go via Dubai, London, New York, etc because great scientists like Aristotle said that earth is round?.
The instant pointer is that two innate and inherent traits of something cannot be correlated in two different tenses or for that matter even just stated (without correlation) in two different tenses. By assuming that we can use past tense for the auk, we wrongly mean that they don't any more provide the delicious meat. This is untenable since the auk is still not entirely extinct, and there must be some good numbers still available. I am afraid we cannot let go this fatal error in A, B, C, and E.
Time is precious in the hall.
The instant pointer is that two innate and inherent traits of something cannot be correlated in two different tenses or for that matter even just stated (without correlation) in two different tenses. By assuming that we can use past tense for the auk, we wrongly mean that they don't any more provide the delicious meat. This is untenable since the auk is still not entirely extinct, and there must be some good numbers still available. I am afraid we cannot let go this fatal error in A, B, C, and E.
Time is precious in the hall.
