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

 It is currently 16 Feb 2019, 21:51

### 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

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

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in February
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
272829303112
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272812
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Algebra Webinar

February 17, 2019

February 17, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this Free Algebra Webinar and learn how to master Inequalities and Absolute Value problems on GMAT.
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

February 16, 2019

February 16, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

# The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Nov 2012, 10:59
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

68% (01:11) correct 32% (01:32) wrong based on 464 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

(A) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise

(B) both to prohibit individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies while forbidding the companies to advertise

(C) to both prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and also to forbid the companies from advertising

(D) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as well as to forbid the companies from advertising

(E) to prohibit both individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies from advertising

For a full discussion of these idioms and this question, see:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/verbs-that ... -the-gmat/

_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1101
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Nov 2012, 20:42
1
An easy A.
Basically the question about Idioms and I really doubt whether these types of questions are still asked in test.
Prohibit X from Y.
Forbid x to y.
"and also" is redundant.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 27
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.37
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Nov 2012, 22:10
1
Prohibit: from
Forbid: to

__________________________________
Lets Kudos
Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2011
Posts: 185
Location: India
GMAT 1: 440 Q33 V13
GPA: 3
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Nov 2012, 02:53
+1 A

I selected this based on idiom BOTH x AND y

is this correct elimination ??
_________________

GMAT - Practice, Patience, Persistence
Kudos if u like

Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Posts: 10
Concentration: General Management
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2012, 03:13
There are 2 Idioms on this questions:

1. Both X & Y (which eliminates B & D)
2. Prohibit X from Y (which eliminates C & E)

Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2013
Posts: 280
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.6
WE: Brand Management (Retail)
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2013, 03:08
I am not good with idioms so spotted the mistakes of words used in the options.

Posted from GMAT ToolKit
_________________

Cheers
Farhan

My Blog - Student for Life ( Oxford MBA)

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2013, 08:23
1
farhanc85 wrote:
I am not good with idioms so spotted the mistakes of words used in the options.

Dear farhanc85

http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom-ebook/

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)

Retired Moderator
Joined: 26 Nov 2012
Posts: 592
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2016, 10:38
sislam04 wrote:
Please help me, I am so frustrated with this section. I feel like it's all arbitrary sometimes. The correct answer is A and I chose C. I understand the idiomatic expression "both X and Y" is correct which is one of the issues with C. My bigger problem is how come in terms of parallelism how come "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? Also as a side note: How come these words can stay in the infinitive form? I thought the Gmat dislikes the infinitive

The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

(A) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise

(B) both to prohibit individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies while forbidding the companies to advertise

(C) to both prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and also to forbid the companies from advertising

(D) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as well as to forbid the companies from advertising

(E) to prohibit both individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies from advertising

When read the sentence you need to check whether idioms are used properly.

In our case idioms used are prohibit... and forbid...

Prohibit FROM -- Correct idiom
Forbid TO - Correct idiom

Now check which options have these...

Only option A has this...

Hope this clears the clouds...
Intern
Joined: 15 Jan 2014
Posts: 34
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: Haas '19
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 2.5
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2016, 11:01
In this question FDA enacted recent restrictions and these restrictions are for some purpose so we will ask question what is the purpose of these restrictions..

We got 2 i.e. To Prohibit ...... And 2nd one is To forbid .....

So whenever we see some action with purpose we use infinitive of purpose to + verb.

Thanks

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Intern
Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Posts: 4
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2016, 13:31
msk0657 wrote:
sislam04 wrote:
Please help me, I am so frustrated with this section. I feel like it's all arbitrary sometimes. The correct answer is A and I chose C. I understand the idiomatic expression "both X and Y" is correct which is one of the issues with C. My bigger problem is how come in terms of parallelism how come "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? Also as a side note: How come these words can stay in the infinitive form? I thought the Gmat dislikes the infinitive

The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

(A) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise

(B) both to prohibit individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies while forbidding the companies to advertise

(C) to both prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and also to forbid the companies from advertising

(D) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as well as to forbid the companies from advertising

(E) to prohibit both individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies from advertising

When read the sentence you need to check whether idioms are used properly.

In our case idioms used are prohibit... and forbid...

Prohibit FROM -- Correct idiom
Forbid TO - Correct idiom

Now check which options have these...

Only option A has this...

Hope this clears the clouds...

I was asking specifically about the parallelism how come in terms of parallelism how come "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? I understand the idiomatic portion
Board of Directors
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 4382
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2016, 20:47
sislam04 wrote:
I know this question isn't testing parallelism and it's testing for correct idiomatic usage. I just had a question as to why in terms of parallelism "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? Which is why I chose "c" which is wrong because it's not idiomatic but still "A" isn't parallel''

The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

(A) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise

(B) both to prohibit individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies while forbidding the companies to advertise

(C) to both prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and also to forbid the companies from advertising

(D) both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as well as to forbid the companies from advertising

(E) to prohibit both individual physicians to form financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies from advertising

There are 2 issues here with Parallellism -

1. Both X and Y
2. To X .............To Y

Both the issues have been correctly addressed only in option (A)

The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

Among the given options only (A) is hence the correct choice.
_________________

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )

Intern
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 14
GMAT 1: 620 Q45 V31
GMAT 2: 710 Q47 V40
GPA: 3.5
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2016, 23:24
sislam,

I think you have misunderstood parallelism a bit. In a parallel structure both [X] and [Y] , you are correct that X and Y needs to be logically and grammatically of the same structure. But it doesn't mean that they should have the same kind of words in the whole phrase. Let me explain this further.

In a list [X] and [Y] can be of the form :
1. All Nouns
2. All Verbs
3. All modifiers
4. All clauses or phrases.

Now, in this example the list contains to-verb and then do something. The only structure that needs to be parallel is the to-verb and the 'do something' that comes after a the infinitive depends on the idiomatic usage of the corresponding action.

both [X] and [Y]
both to prohibit individual physians.... and to forbid companies ...
[X] -> to prohibit [noun]
[Y] -> to forbid [noun]

Rest of the phrase\clause structure doesnt matter as long as their usage is correct and logical.

So to answer your question, forming and to advertise need not be parallel because they are not the parallel structure.

C is wrong for another reason and you will find this error common among GMAT\OG questions.
both always takes 'and' and only and no other conjuction is used. Here the structure is both [X] and also [Y]. 'and' + also is redundant both conveying the same thing.

Remember 'both' and 'between' always need 'and' to be of correct usage.

Hope this helps.
Current Student
Joined: 08 Jun 2013
Posts: 33
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2016, 00:49
3
The parallelism is between both X and Y and not what you assumed.

a) both X an Y - parallel (to prohibit is parallel with to forbid)
b) both X while Y - not correct idiom
c) to both and also to - not parallel. And, both needs and, use of also is redundant.
d) both X as well as Y - incorrect idiom
e) to prohibit both X and Y - not parallel(distorts the meaning)
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2900
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2016, 09:05
sislam04 wrote:

I was asking specifically about the parallelism how come in terms of parallelism how come "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? I understand the idiomatic portion

Th parrallel elements are "to prohibit" and " to forbid" - the parallelism structure does not have anything to do with the rest - "from forming" and "to advertise" has no bearing with the parallelism - appropriate prepositions and forms has to be used as necessary.

Would you say there is a parallelism error in the following sentence?

I love to play with my sister, sing in the rain and walk alone..... does the question arise why "with my sister", "in the rain" and "alone" are not parallel?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2016, 15:41
sislam04 wrote:
I was asking specifically about the parallelism how come in terms of parallelism how come "to prohibit" and "to forbid" are parallel but "forming" and "advertise" don't have to be parallel? I understand the idiomatic portion

Dear sislam04,

I'm happy to respond to your question. I see that sayantanc2k replied, but I want to take a slightly broader view.

Students have a few typical misconceptions about parallelism. Fundamentally, students conceive of parallelism primarily as a grammatical structure. It is not. Parallelism is primarily a logical structure, and the matching grammar merely mirrors the underlying logic. Following this misconception, students mistakenly believe that parallelism means that the two branches have to be lockstep precision, matching down to the last detail. That's absurd. There only has to be enough grammatical matching to make the logical pattern clear.

Here's the OA of the question that I wrote:
The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual physicians from forming financial partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and to forbid the companies to advertise directly to the physicians.

How much has to match in parallelism? Only enough to make the logical pattern clear. The FDA had two purposes in enacting these restrictions, to prohibit something and to forbid something. These are both expressed as infinitives of purpose. Those two are in parallel, so they have to match, and they do: both are infinitives: "both to prohibit . . . and to forbid . . . " That's the parallelism, right there, between those two infinitives. That's it.

What happens after that high level matching is 100% irrelevant to the parallelism. Once the logical pattern of matching is established, the job of parallelism has been fulfilled, and it places no more requirements on the sentence.

More importantly, within the two infinitive clauses, we have to follow the rules of idioms. The verb "prohibit" idiomatically takes from + [gerund]. The verb "forbid" idiomatically takes the infinitive. When I designed this question, I specifically chose two verbs that would have two different idioms. For more help on idioms, see the free GMAT idiom flashcards. The requirements of parallelism never never never supersede the rules of idiom.

You see, two verbs in parallel could have different tenses, or one could be active and one passive, or one have a long modifying clause and the other not. It doesn't matter. Parallelism is not a mathematical pattern that forces every single element into a precise Procrustean pattern. Parallelism is a logical pattern, and the matching grammar need only make clear the logic, no more.

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)

SC Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1679
Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2018, 05:13

Official Explanation

This is a tricky one. We have the "both X and Y" parallel construction. Notice that the variants "both X while Y", "both X and also Y", and "both X as well as Y" --- choices (B), (C), and (D) respectively ---- are all incorrect on the GMAT. The two infinitive verbs, "to prohibit" and "to forbid" must match in parallel form, and they do in all five. What follows those two verbs does not have to be parallel; furthermore, each of those verbs has its own idiomatical requirements. As this blog discusses, the proper idiom for "forbid" is "to forbid A to do X" — the verb "forbid" must take the infinitive. By contrast, the proper idiom for "prohibit" is "to prohibit A from doing X" — the verb "prohibit" must take the preposition "from" followed by a gerund. The two verbs, "forbid" and "prohibit" have similar meanings, so it's ironic that they have starkly different idiomatic requirements. The only answer that fulfills the idiomatic requirements of both verbs is (A).
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood

Re: The FDA enacted these recent restrictions both to prohibit individual   [#permalink] 05 Sep 2018, 05:13
Display posts from previous: Sort by