krishnabalu
eybrj2 wrote:
The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction because, resulting from intensive inbreeding generations ago, the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
(A) because, resulting from intensive inbreeding generations ago,
(B) because, as a result of intensive inbreeding generations ago,
(C) because they inbred intensively generations ago so that
(D) because there was intensive inbreeding generations ago and
(E) as a result of their intensive inbreeding generations ago, and
Quick POE (assuming that the logic does not strike)
(1) Eliminate C and E because
they and
their, plural, do not agree with
the cheetah, singular.
We know that "the cheetah" is singular from the non-underlined portion that uses the singular verb
seems.(2) COMPARE B and D
-- eliminate D for
there was. B is clearer.
Now we are left with A or B.
(3) Answer A or B?
Read them. Even if the logic is not clear, can you give even one reason that A is better than B? (Probably not.)
Still stuck? Choose one and move on. Your odds are 50/50.
More accurate POE This sentence contains nested or embedded logic.
Inbreeding a long time ago led to a lack of genetic variation.
That lack of genetic variation, in turn, made the cheetah vulnerable to the environment.
Finally, that vulnerability led to the danger of extinction (the cheetah does not adapt well).
This sentence simply starts with the final result. After that it lists the logical chain that leads to "danger of extinction."
We need words that supply clear links between cause and result.
Quote:
(A) The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction because, resulting from intensive inbreeding generations ago, the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
• comma + resulting modifies "the cheetah seems to be headed for extinction."
-- comma + present participle modifies the preceding clause, (or the subject of that clause, or, occasionally, the immediately preceding noun)
-- that is, the verbING phrase points
backwards to the first part of the sentence
What does intensive inbreeding generations ago have to do with danger of extinction now?
(We have not yet read the other parts. Do not apply those parts in your head.
)
Answer: Nothing obvious.
More logical: inbreeding is connected to a lack of genetic variation. Inbreeding directly caused the lack of variation.
• "resulting...from inbreeding" has skipped these two steps:
Inbreeding => too little genetic variation
Too little genetic variation => vulnerability to environment
From the logic chain above we can see that the "resulting FROM" phrase needs to "point" to genetic variation, not to extinction.
• the phrasing? "because, resulting" is strained and cumbersome.
• If you are worried, hold (A) and compare with (B). No contest.
Quote:
(C) The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction because they inbred intensively generations ago so that , the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
• the cheetah is singular. In the non-underlined part we have
cheetah seems (singular)
The noun and pronoun do not agree
•
so that is followed by a comma? If so, no.
so that is a conjunction that needs NOT to be separated from the "so little genetic variation" clause. Inbreeding directly caused scant genetic variation.
• Compare. On the GMAT,
so that typically expresses purpose rather than result.
-- Furthermore, when
so that pitted against a choice that is more explicit about "result,"
so that is not preferred.
-- The phrase is not as clear logically as the phrase in B:
as a result ofQuote:
D) The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction because there was intensive inbreeding generations ago and , the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
• GMAC does not like causality to be expressed by "and." (Stronger: AND does not express causality.)
• The AND makes it sound as if the species is headed for extinction because of two separate causes.
AND incorrectly signals:
(1) On the one hand, intensive inbreeding, by itself, caused the danger of extinction, and
(2) on the other hand, scant genetic variation that makes the cheetah species vulnerable also caused the danger of extinction
Wrong meaning.
How is inbreeding causally connected to extinction? Further, did scant genetic variation arise from nothing?
AND is wrong.
Intensive inbreeding
led to scant genetic variation. The two AND phrases are connected. One precedes the other.
• AND is followed by a comma? At best, strange.
• no need for "there was." The phrase does not convey that lack of genetic variation is a direct result of inbreeding.
Quote:
(E) The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction as a result of their intensive inbreeding generations ago, and, the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
• the pronoun
their does not agree with the singular cheetah
• AND poses the same problems as those described in (D)
Quote:
(B) The cheetah seems to be headed for extinction because, as a result of intensive inbreeding generations ago,, the species has so little genetic variation that it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change.
No errors. If I have time to check the logic, I use only the words in B and start with the reasons that
follow because.Each reason should connect to the next one, and I should be able to say "therefore" and conclude with the extinction danger.
[A]s a result of intensive inbreeding generations ago,
the [cheetah] species has so little genetic variation that
it is extremely vulnerable to environmental change:
THEREFORE
the cheetah seems to be headed for extinction.
That works.
Answer B
close
23 Mar 2012, 00:28
35%
(medium)
35%
(01:31)
wrong 
