Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 20:21 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 20:21
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
605-655 Level|   Grammatical/Rhetorical Construction|   Parallelism|   Subject Verb Agreement|                                 
avatar
GVelarde
Joined: 06 Mar 2020
Last visit: 19 Oct 2022
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Location: United States (CA)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45 (Online)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45 (Online)
Posts: 13
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

Can you try to rewrite the two options for what the author is trying to convey, jabhatta2, but this time include this part: independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia

Hi avigutman - written out the sentences as requested

Quote:

(1) trenches are proof of the existence of centrally administered complex societies (in the middle east) (that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia)

or

(2) trenches are proof that centrally administered complex societies arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia

In (1) -- the stuff in the brackets are modifiers to societies. The blue modifier is passable too. The modifier in blue gives us MORE info (like a FYI) about these complex societies

In (2) -- the verb 'arose' MAKES sense with the pink.
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2

(1) trenches are proof of the existence of centrally administered complex societies (in the middle east) (that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia)

or

(2) trenches are proof that centrally administered complex societies arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia

In (1) -- the stuff in the brackets are modifiers to societies. The blue modifier is passable too. The modifier in blue gives us MORE info (like a FYI) about these complex societies

In (2) -- the verb 'arose' MAKES sense with the pink.

Let's dig in to that blue modifier now, jabhatta2. In order to decide whether it's passable, we have to consider meaning, not just grammar.
So, this FYI about these complex societies... In your view, does it make sense with this overarching goal:
jabhatta2
(1) trenches are proof of the existence of centrally administered complex societies
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman - Does the blue makes sense with the overarching goal ?

That modifier is used when you want to distinguish between 2 groups. So the blue modifer implies there are 2 types of complex socieities.

Quote:

(type 1) -- complex societies that were arising simultaneously with but independently of more celebrated city-states
(type 2) -- complex societies that were NOT arising simultaneously with but independently of more celebrated city-states

These Trenches could very well, show proof of the existence of (type 1) complex societies
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2

That modifier is used when you want to distinguish between 2 groups. So the blue modifer implies there are 2 types of complex socieities.

Quote:

(type 1) -- complex societies that were arising simultaneously with but independently of more celebrated city-states
(type 2) -- complex societies that were NOT arising simultaneously with but independently of more celebrated city-states

These Trenches could very well, show proof of the existence of (type 1) complex societies

jabhatta2 part of our job in SC is to be a mind reader: which interpretation is the author more likely to be trying to convey? Here are analogous sentences for (A) and (E) in case that's helpful:

(A) The study has yielded strong evidence for democracy in America that was arising simultaneously with but independently of the more well known democracies of Europe [as opposed to democracy in America that wasn't arising simultaneously with but independently of the more well known democracies of Europe]

(E) The study has yielded strong evidence that democracy in America arose simultaneously with but independently of the more well known democracies of Europe.

Try to imagine this author writing the sentence as an announcement, perhaps to let people know that their prior assumptions were wrong. What could those prior assumptions have been? If the author is attempting to change the reader's mind, or educate the reader, what could the reader have been thinking prior to reading the sentence? Feel free to respond with your thoughts on the above.
User avatar
vv65
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 774
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 395
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
How would you ascertain (from a meaning perspective), which one of the 2 options is what trenches proove ?

I actually thought it made more sense to say -- trenches proove the existence of centrally administered complex societies, rather than proof that something happened
Most of us simply concluded that the writer was referring to proof that something happened. But let us say that the other meaning is equally possible; perhaps the writer meant proof that something exists.

We now have two possible meanings. What to do? Should we choose an answer based on our best guess of what the author meant?

That could go wrong (as it did for you). In a case like this, look at other differences between A and E. After all, meaning is not the only thing that matters in SC.

The writers of this question cleverly made A and E different enough. The other differences between A and E give E an edge.

You don't want to rely on idioms, but you can look at verb tense, concision, crispness.
Our job in SC is to choose the best of the five answers, and E is better than A

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
vv65
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 774
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Posts: 534
Kudos: 395
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Please read this
https://www.mba.com/exams-and-exam-prep ... xpert-tips

The article says, "Once you have eliminated a few answer choices, make sure to carefully leverage every clue provided by the differences in the remaining answer choices".

It goes on to say, "Analyzing every little hint that is given by differences in the answers is the key on this GMAT Verbal question type, yet students rarely do that effectively."

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
DmitryFarber
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,020
Own Kudos:
8,563
 [1]
Given Kudos: 57
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,020
Kudos: 8,563
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2


We can make a pretty strong case that meaning #1 is not intended. First, if the sentence wanted to talk about evidence for the existence of these societies, then it could add easily add that word for clarity. The fact that it didn't, and that several of the answer choices provide a different meaning, is evidence in itself. It's also not clear that "evidence for societies" really means anything. Evidence of societies would be clear, but evidence "for" something would usually be evidence to support a case, or a particular party in an argument ("evidence for my hypothesis," "evidence for the prosecution"). It isn't normally used when we're trying to see whether something exists at all. As we've just seen, there are other, clearer ways to do that.

However, the biggest problem of all with #1 is that it doesn't fit with the rest of the sentence. If we read (A) that way, the sentence is saying that we have "evidence for" these societies, but it's also saying that these societies "were arising,' etc. If we know for a fact when these societies arose, how could their existence still be a matter of debate? And if we don't know when they arose, then that's more reason to use meaning #2. We're not just trying to see if these societies existed at all; we're trying to figure out their chronology.
User avatar
woohoo921
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 516
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 623
Posts: 516
Kudos: 142
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
paddyboy
Hi
i have doubt with option E.
"cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but"
"The first trenches cut into........." is a clause.
I think cut is a verb for the subject "first trenches"......Now in the same sentence, another verb "have yielded" too stands fr the subject "The first trenches"
So my doubt is hwo can there be two verb fr the same subject, when there is no connector.


"cut into a 500 acre ..." is a modifier. It modifies 'trenches' i.e. it tells you more about the trenches.
As pointed out by Vercules above, "cut into a 500 acre" can be replaced by "that were cut into a 500 acre". The meaning doesn't change but you can see clearly that "cut into..." is modifying trenches.
The verb is 'have yielded'.

KarishmaB

I am a bit confused on the parallelism requirement mentioned above

"were arising simultaneously but independently of southern Mesopotamia --> NOT PARALLEL
were arising simultaneously with but independently of southern Mesopotamia --> PARALLEL"


What does the "with" mean in this case? Does it mean that the societies arose when southern Mesopotamia arose, but they were not connected to southern Mesopotamia?
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,983
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,265
Kudos: 76,983
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
woohoo921
KarishmaB
paddyboy
Hi
i have doubt with option E.
"cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but"
"The first trenches cut into........." is a clause.
I think cut is a verb for the subject "first trenches"......Now in the same sentence, another verb "have yielded" too stands fr the subject "The first trenches"
So my doubt is hwo can there be two verb fr the same subject, when there is no connector.


"cut into a 500 acre ..." is a modifier. It modifies 'trenches' i.e. it tells you more about the trenches.
As pointed out by Vercules above, "cut into a 500 acre" can be replaced by "that were cut into a 500 acre". The meaning doesn't change but you can see clearly that "cut into..." is modifying trenches.
The verb is 'have yielded'.

KarishmaB

I am a bit confused on the parallelism requirement mentioned above

"were arising simultaneously but independently of southern Mesopotamia --> NOT PARALLEL
were arising simultaneously with but independently of southern Mesopotamia --> PARALLEL"


What does the "with" mean in this case? Does it mean that the societies arose when southern Mesopotamia arose, but they were not connected to southern Mesopotamia?


This is what the 'that' clause is:

... societies ... arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ...

It connects two ideas:

... societies ... arose simultaneously with the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ...
... societies ... arose independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ...

Using 'but' we have connected both these ideas together but if separated they both should make sense with the rest of the sentence.

If we remove 'with,' this is what we get:
... societies ... arose simultaneously but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ...

which breaks into two like this:

... societies ... arose simultaneously of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ... (doesn't make sense)
... societies ... arose independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia ... (acceptable)

Societies can rise simultaneously with city-states..., not simultaneously of city-states ...
Hence, we need the 'with' we have put after 'simultaneously.'
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also

(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but

(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but
Hi experts,
So, can I say that ''strong evidence'' is the object of ''centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose''?
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.


(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also

(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but

(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but
The first trenches THAT WERE cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

Hi RonTargetTestPrep, MartyTargetTestPrep, GMATNinja
What is the difference between choice E and the above one?
This types of questions confused me a lot to make the decision!
User avatar
SatvikVedala
Joined: 03 Oct 2022
Last visit: 03 May 2025
Posts: 177
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 51
Posts: 177
Kudos: 121
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jerrywu
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.


(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also

(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but

(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but

Simultaneously with more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia

Option C, D are out

Use of “for” in option A changes the meaning (implies information for CACS instead of information regarding CACS). Option A is out

“Yields” with “Trenches” causes S-V disagreement. Option B is out

Hence, Option E
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ReedArnoldMPREP AjiteshArun EducationAisle IanStewart

In (A) - why is "Evidence For" wrong ?

I understand idioms have to be memorized but If I was to make some SIMPLE sentences, something is awry.

Don't we say the following

-- Journalists from Africa have provided evidence for War Crimes

-- Scientists have provided evidence for climate change

-- The prosecution has provided sufficient evidence for the death penalty.

Similarly - i thought the first trenches provided evidence FOR centrally administered complex societies

-----------

Other than idiom - any better way to eliminate (A) ?
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,145
Own Kudos:
10,984
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,145
Kudos: 10,984
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2

In (A) - why is "Evidence For" wrong ?

I understand idioms have to be memorized but If I was to make some SIMPLE sentences, something is awry.

I at first wondered why you were asking, because we say "evidence for" all the time. Then I read the first few replies in this thread, where three experts all claim that the phrase "evidence for" is not idiomatic. Those posts are all wrong. The phrase "evidence for" has a slightly different meaning than the phrase "evidence of", and they can't be used interchangeably, but "evidence for" is certainly fine when it's used correctly. I'll suggest reading Dmitry Farber's post above if you want a good explanation of the subtle difference in meaning of those two phrases. I wouldn't say answer A is wrong on idiom grounds here; it just doesn't convey the meaning the sentence intends, and its choice of verb tenses is a bit incomprehensible.
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
HI IanStewart – one last q on (A)

Not sure why the verb “were arising” in (A) is wrong exactly.

Were arising” is past continuous progressive

The past continuous progressive per my understanding is used for actions

- in the past
- Action that is ONGOING WITH another event

Please correct me if i am wrong.

If so, in this case -- isn't "Were arising" apt because "Were arising" was ongoing WITH ANOTHER EVENT ?

The OTHER EVENT is "simultaneously with the city-states of southern Mesopotamia"
User avatar
Onkar1998
Joined: 19 Dec 2022
Last visit: 15 Sep 2024
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 30
Posts: 5
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
although " that were cut" is overly wordy is this deterministic error
User avatar
tsraeroshad
Joined: 14 Mar 2023
Last visit: 02 Aug 2023
Posts: 11
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 11
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I understand that E might be the best among the lot.
But I can't come terms with how this is correct:

".....simultaneously with but also independently...."

Can someone help me with this. Also could you show any other example where such a construction is used.
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts