Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 15:26 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 15:26

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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
VP
VP
Joined: 18 Dec 2017
Posts: 1170
Own Kudos [?]: 991 [0]
Given Kudos: 421
Location: United States (KS)
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Send PM
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 5330
Own Kudos [?]: 35490 [3]
Given Kudos: 9464
Send PM
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 5330
Own Kudos [?]: 35490 [0]
Given Kudos: 9464
Send PM
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 5330
Own Kudos [?]: 35490 [0]
Given Kudos: 9464
Send PM
The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
Expert Reply
TheNightKing wrote:
bsd_lover wrote:
The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to foods that do not contain color or flavor additives, chemical preservatives, or nothing that has been synthesized.
(A) or nothing that has been
(B) or that has been
(C) and nothing that is
(D) or anything that has been
(E) and anything


foods that do not contain X or Y, Z and W. Why can't these three things be parallel and hence make E as the answer?

TheNightKing , see my post above, HERE.

I cannot decide whether you are confused about parallelism or about AND.

Your construction is understandable but not correct.
You are missing an Oxford comma before Z. I have never seen a correct GMAC question without an Oxford comma.
Better: foods that do not contain X1 or X2, Y, or Z.

In addition, we can highlight the nouns.

The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the word "natural" to foods that do not contain additives that enhance color or flavor, preservatives that are made from chemicals, or anything that has been synthesized.

Now let's dump the adjectives. And let's call "anything that has been synthesized" something else: synthetics.

Advertisers must restrict the use of the word "natural" to foods that do not contain additives, OR preservatives, OR synthetics.
If a food contains additives, it cannot be called natural.
If a different food contains preservatives, it also cannot be called natural.
If yet another food contains synthetics, it also cannot be called natural.

None of those three foods could be called "natural."
(If a food contained two of the three or three of the three prohibited substances, that food could not be called "natural.")

Quote:
Why can't these three things be parallel and hence make E as the answer?

Those three things can be (and are) parallel.

They are all prohibited substances.

The problem is the word AND.

Use X1 or X2, Y, and Z. (I'm marking this in red because I do not want others to think that this construction is okay. It isn't.)

Those three items are parallel.
There are three nouns: additives (X1, X2), preservatives (Y), and things that have been synthesized (Z).
There are two kinds of additives, so you could use
foods that do not contain W, X, Y, and Z.

Does either list that uses AND make more sense than a list with OR?
If so, why? If you make an argument or ask a more specific question, I will be happy to try to help.

Hope that helps.
Current Student
Joined: 15 Jun 2020
Posts: 319
Own Kudos [?]: 81 [1]
Given Kudos: 245
Location: United States
GPA: 3.3
Send PM
The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
(A) or nothing that has been
(1) double negative – “foods that do not contain…, nothing…”

(B) or that has been
(1) illogical structure/meaning – “the word ‘natural’ to foods THAT do not contain X, Y, …or THAT has been synthesized.”; this means the word “natural” would be used for food that has been synthesized. (2) SV agreement error – even if the logical meaning made sense in (1), there is a SV error: “…restrict the use of the word ‘natural’ to foods…THAT has been synthesized.” “foods” = plural; “has” = singular

(C) and nothing that is
(1) illogical meaning – “foods that do not contain…, and nothing…”?; (2) use of “and” – [“color or flavor additives, chemical preservatives and nothing that is synthesized”] is all one thing. Presumably, they want to say that they are all separate things and the food do not contain each one of them.

(D) or anything that has been
Correct answer – “foods that do not contain…flavor additives (a noun), chemical preservatives (a noun), or anything (noun) [THAT has been synthesized] (modifier of the previous noun - 'anything')”

(E) and anything
(1) use of “and” – [“color or flavor additives, chemical preservatives and anything synthesized”] is all one thing. Presumably, they want to say that they are all separate things and the food do not contain each one of them.

Originally posted by mba757 on 17 Aug 2020, 19:01.
Last edited by mba757 on 04 Sep 2020, 20:46, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2021
Posts: 149
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: Canada
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
GMATNinja, can you please clarify why using ''and'' as it was done in E may not be aligned with the intended meaning of the sentence? What does it indicate in this sentence that ''or '' and not ''and'' should be used to express an intended meaning of the sentence?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6921
Own Kudos [?]: 63668 [0]
Given Kudos: 1774
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
Expert Reply
tkorzhan1995 wrote:
GMATNinja, can you please clarify why using ''and'' as it was done in E may not be aligned with the intended meaning of the sentence? What does it indicate in this sentence that ''or '' and not ''and'' should be used to express an intended meaning of the sentence?

Good question.

If we go with "and" (as in choice E), it implies that you can use the word "natural" as long as your food doesn't contain ALL THREE of those things. In other words, even if your food has one or two of those things, then you can still call it a "natural" food.

If we go with "or" (as in choice D), it implies that you can't use the word "natural" if your food has ANY of those three things. That makes a lot more sense -- if your food has, for example, chemical preservatives and a bunch of synthesized ingredients, then it probably shouldn't be called "natural," even if it does not contain color or flavor additives.

And if you aren't quite convinced, then you have one final clue in deciding between (D) and (E): the addition of "that has been" makes the meaning of "synthesized" a bit more specific and clear. Since (D) makes more sense and is a bit more clear, it's our winner.

I hope that helps!
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2021
Posts: 149
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: Canada
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
GMATNinja, thank you for your response. Could you please provide more explanation on the following?
- Can you please provide additional guidance where I am getting wrong with my analysis below?
X, Y and Z--> I understand all three items must be present;
X, Y or Z--> As far as I understand, X+Y or Z must be present, but not all of them.

- Why that has been synthesized makes D more specific?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6921
Own Kudos [?]: 63668 [1]
Given Kudos: 1774
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
tkorzhan1995 wrote:
GMATNinja, thank you for your response. Could you please provide more explanation on the following?
- Can you please provide additional guidance where I am getting wrong with my analysis below?
X, Y and Z--> I understand all three items must be present;
X, Y or Z--> As far as I understand, X+Y or Z must be present, but not all of them.

- Why that has been synthesized makes D more specific?

Let's start with a simpler example:

    "Tim will not eat the burrito if it contains (1) shrimp, (2) cilantro, or (3) mayonnaise."

It doesn't matter whether the burrito has only 1 of those things, only 2 of those things, or all 3 of those things. As long as the burrito has AT LEAST 1 of those things, Tim will not eat it.

We have a similar situation in (D). Here's a simplified version:

    "Use the word 'natural' for foods that do not contain (1) flavor additives, (2) chemical preservatives, or (3) anything that has been synthesized."

It doesn't matter whether the food has 1 of those things, 2 of those things, or all 3 of those things. As long as the food has AT LEAST 1 of those things, we can't use the word "natural" to describe that food.

So we don't need (1) + (2) -- we just need (1), (2), or (3). Again, we need at least one of the three.

Quote:
Why that has been synthesized makes D more specific?

This is a subtle point and certainly not one that you should use to eliminate (E).

Let's say you have no idea what "synthesized" means, but you read "any food that has been synthesized." Because "synthesized" is part of a verb here, you at least get the sense that something was done to the food. This suggests that the foods underwent some process -- presumably some unnatural process.

While (E) might leave you completely guessing what the heck a "synthesized" food is, the verb in (D) helps guide the reader towards a logical meaning. Again, that is certainly NOT a reason to eliminate (E), but it's an extra little vote in favor of the option that's already looking much better than (E).

I hope that helps!
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Jul 2019
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
Looking forward to getting an expert reply on this. "Or" does not comply with the sentence structure since all the three items listed are necessities. Usage of "and" is clear since the commission does not want any of the three items of the food to be labelled as 'natural'
CEO
CEO
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 3675
Own Kudos [?]: 3528 [1]
Given Kudos: 149
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Preyansh wrote:
Looking forward to getting an expert reply on this. "Or" does not comply with the sentence structure since all the three items listed are necessities. Usage of "and" is clear since the commission does not want any of the three items of the food to be labelled as 'natural'

The way to look at it is that natural foods cannot contain either X or Y or Z.

In other words, even if one of these three items is present, the food will not qualify as "natural" food.
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14823
Own Kudos [?]: 64923 [1]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Preyansh wrote:
Looking forward to getting an expert reply on this. "Or" does not comply with the sentence structure since all the three items listed are necessities. Usage of "and" is clear since the commission does not want any of the three items of the food to be labelled as 'natural'



'and' is conjunctive so it combines things.
'or' is disjunctive so it separates them.

'... that do not contain A, B and C' - would normally mean they do not contain the three together.
'... that do not contain A, B or C' - would normally mean they do not contain any of these three.

Think about it:
Don't wear a red shirt and yellow trousers to my party. - means don't wear this combination
Don't wear a red shirt or yellow trousers to my party. - means don't wear either
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Apr 2020
Posts: 185
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [0]
Given Kudos: 2218
GMAT 1: 620 Q45 V30
Send PM
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
Which sentence is correct in meaning :

1. it is restricted to use word Natural to food that contains chemical.

2. it is restricted to use word Natural to food that do not contains chemical.

Expert guide me here. If 1 is correct then the question, which uses "do not", is wrong.

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The commission has directed advertisers to restrict the use of the wor [#permalink]
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

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