The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other. (A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as (B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is (C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as (D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was (E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being comma + with (adverbial modifier) = LINK 1 & LINK 2 & LINK 3 & LINK 4 & LINK 5 & LINK 6 & LINK 7 Thule Artifacts (A) Meaning / Idiom (B) Meaning (C) Meaning / Idiom (D) CORRECT (E) Modifier / Meaning (with … being) First glance The opening of each answer choice changes significantly. This problem doesn’t have a great initial clue as to what the sentence may be testing. When this happens, pay special attention to overall sentence structure and meaning when reading the original sentence. Issues (1) Meaning: explained as Logically, the sentence is trying to say that the fact that these artifacts are so similar can be explained by, or is due to, the fact that people were moving throughout this region; presumably, they were carrying these artifacts with them. Explained by , however, does not mean the same thing as explained as , which the sentence uses. Explained as is used when you’re trying to connect or equate two things. For example, compare these two sentences: A yawn can be explained as a generally involuntary reflex consisting of an intake of air accompanied by a release of pressure (or popping) in the eardrums. (This explains what a yawn is.) The doctor’s endless yawning can be explained by her lack of sufficient sleep the night before. (This explains why she’s yawning.) In the problem, the similarity of the artifacts is not a rapid movement of people . Rather, the similarity might be the result of this rapid movement. Eliminate answers (A) and (C). (2) Meaning / Modifier: Thule artifacts … region The opening modifier is constructed incorrectly. The word being is tricky to use properly. Consider this incorrect sentence: The dogs being similar, one explanation is that they are siblings. When the intent of the sentence is something like The fact that (X is true) can be explained by Y , don’t use the being construction above. In this case, the structure of the opening modifier does not indicate that the explanation in question is about why the dogs are similar. Eliminate answer (B). (3) Meaning / Modifier: with … being A comma + with modifier is an adverbial modifier; it refers to the main action taking place in the sentence. Consider these two correct examples: He jumped crazily on the trampoline, with arms and legs flying everywhere. She ate too much at dinner, with the result that she suffered indigestion. In the first correct example, the comma with modifier describes an action taking place simultaneously with the main action. In the second correct example, the comma with modifier introduces a consequence of the main action. In the problem, though, the comma with modifier tries to explain the main clause; this is not an acceptable way to structure this meaning. Consider this incorrect example: She ate too much at dinner, with the explanation being that she hadn’t eaten anything all day. Rather, She ate too much at dinner because she hadn’t eaten anything all day. The Correct Answer Correct answer (D) fixes the original meaning error by changing the structure of the sentence completely: One explanation for the remarkable similarity is that people moved around a lot. The passive structure of the rest of that sentence (there was a very rapid movement of people) will likely cause many people to eliminate this choice. If you did, or were tempted to do so, remind yourself in future: there is nothing inherently wrong with the passive voice . Don’t eliminate just because a choice is passive . Note: in the first printing of the 2016 edition of The Official Guide for GMAT Review, the question text on page 678 does not completely match the re-print of the same question on page 717. This solution follows the problem as printed on page 678.

Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 21:32

It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 21:32

Toolkit

Sentence Correction (SC - EA only)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Nov 18
GMAT Quiz #50 - Live GMAT Practice Covering Quant, Verbal, RC, & Data Insights
11:00 AM PST
-
12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 22
GMAT RC Masterclass
11:00 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
Conquer Algebra on the GMAT Focus Edition
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 25
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
10:00 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.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region

1 2 3

sevenplusplus

Joined: 23 Jun 2016

Last visit: 25 Jun 2018

Posts: 61

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 44

Posts: 61

Kudos: 35

07 Nov 2017, 17:41

Kudos

Bookmarks

egmat

Prashant10692

What is function of That in D? Could anyone explain the context.

Hello Prashant10692,

I will be glad to help you out with this one.

In the correct answer choice D, that is a connector/conjunction that joins the preceding independent clause with the following dependent clause.

Basically, the entire that clause acts as an object of the verb is.

Hope this helps.

Thanks.
Shraddha

Hi Shraddha
I felt that this usage of "that" with "there was" was awkward and therefore did not pick option D. I thought that only FANBOYS can connect two clauses.
Would you be able to share some examples, other OG questions where "that" is used to connect two clauses?

Thanks in advance.

KarishmaB

Tutor

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

Posts: 16,265

Kudos: 76,983

[1]

08 Nov 2017, 04:36

Kudos

Bookmarks

Prashant10692

What is function of That in D? Could anyone explain the context.

Check this post on conjunctions: https://www.gmatclub.com/forum/veritas-prep-resource-links-no-longer-available-399979.html#/2014/0 ... -the-gmat/

Also, a that-clause can function as a subject, object, complement, or appositive in a declarative sentence.

sevenplusplus

Joined: 23 Jun 2016

Last visit: 25 Jun 2018

Posts: 61

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 44

Posts: 61

Kudos: 35

[1]

08 Nov 2017, 07:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

VeritasPrepKarishma

Prashant10692

What is function of That in D? Could anyone explain the context.

In D, is usage of “that” to introduce a clause is using it as “subordinating conjunction”?

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

egmat

e-GMAT Representative

Joined: 02 Nov 2011

Last visit: 18 Nov 2025

Posts: 5,108

Own Kudos:

32,884

Given Kudos: 700

GMAT Date: 08-19-2020

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,108

Kudos: 32,884

08 Nov 2017, 14:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

sevenplusplus

Hello sevenplusplus,

Thank you for the query.

Usage of the subordination conjunction that to connect two clauses is very common across the GMAT SC.

Following are just a few examples:

OG 16#9: In a review of 2,000 studies of human behavior that date back to the 1940s, two Swiss psychologists declared that since most of the studies had failed to control for variables such as social class and family size, none could be taken seriously.

OG 16#10 : A long-term study of some 1,000 physicians indicates that the more coffee these doctors drank, the greater was their likelihood of having coronary disease.

OG 16#32: The widely accepted big bang theory holds that the universe began in an explosive instant ten to twenty billion years ago and has been expanding ever since.

Hope this helps.

Thanks.
Shraddha

egmat

e-GMAT Representative

Joined: 02 Nov 2011

Last visit: 18 Nov 2025

Posts: 5,108

Own Kudos:

32,884

Given Kudos: 700

GMAT Date: 08-19-2020

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,108

Kudos: 32,884

08 Nov 2017, 14:47

Kudos

Bookmarks

sevenplusplus

In D, is usage of “that” to introduce a clause is using it as “subordinating conjunction”?

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Hello sevenplusplus,

I will be glad to respond to this one.

Yes indeed. That's exactly the function of that in Choice D.

Hope this helps.

Thanks.
Shraddha

adkikani

IIM School Moderator

Joined: 04 Sep 2016

Last visit: 24 Dec 2023

Posts: 1,236

Own Kudos:

1,343

Given Kudos: 1,207

Location: India

WE:Engineering (Other)

Posts: 1,236

Kudos: 1,343

19 Mar 2018, 00:47

Kudos

Bookmarks

GMATNinja VeritasPrepKarishma sayantanc2k

Is there any better way to reach OA here than to know idioms?

KarishmaB

Tutor

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

Posts: 16,265

Kudos: 76,983

[1]

19 Mar 2018, 05:36

Kudos

Bookmarks

adkikani

GMATNinja VeritasPrepKarishma sayantanc2k

Is there any better way to reach OA here than to know idioms?

Don't think of it as "knowing or not knowing idioms". It is about the meaning of the words "as" and "by".
"as" equates for example "as happy as", "as good as"...
"by" indicates an agency of getting something done... So you can "explain by ..."

I would understand if the idiom tested were say, "to and fro" vs say, "to and back". We use "to and fro" though fro means back. Nowadays, pure idiom testing is usually a smokescreen in GMAT.

HimanshuW11

Joined: 14 Jul 2014

Last visit: 24 Sep 2018

Posts: 62

Own Kudos:

112

Given Kudos: 71

Location: India

Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Strategy

GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34 Verified score

WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)

GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34 Verified score

Posts: 62

Kudos: 112

15 May 2018, 09:59

Kudos

Bookmarks

daagh

egmat

VeritasPrepKarishma

anairamitch1804

sayantanc2k

Why do we eliminate options B and E, as per my understanding we eliminate A and C because of "explained as" because "AS" equates things.

Quote:

"The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.
(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as
(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is
(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as
(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was
(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being "

abhimahna

Board of Directors

Joined: 18 Jul 2015

Last visit: 06 Jul 2024

Posts: 3,514

Own Kudos:

5,728

[2]

Given Kudos: 346

Status:Emory Goizueta Alum

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 3,514

Kudos: 5,728

[2]

15 May 2018, 10:58

Kudos

Bookmarks

HimanshuWadhwa

Why do we eliminate options B and E, as per my understanding we eliminate A and C because of "explained as" because "AS" equates things.

Hey HimanshuWadhwa ,

I am happy to help

You need to understand the construction of the sentences and make sure that sentences are well structured.

Now, let's talk about B and E.

Quote:

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

The blue highlighted line doesn't have a verb in it. So, it is no where a clause. Now, that means it is a phrase and is acting as a modifier.

Modifier + Comma rule says that the modifier MUST refer to the subject of the main clause after the comma.

Here the Subject is "One explanation". That means we are trying to say One explanation was a Thule artifacts being .. blah blah...

Hence, B is incorrect.

Quote:

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being "

The usage of with is incorrect here. I think you should read this article: When to use with on GMAT.

Having said that "with one explanation" here means we are saying they are similar as well as they are with something else. This is wrong.

Does that make sense?

daagh

Major Poster

Joined: 19 Feb 2007

Last visit: 16 Oct 2020

Posts: 5,264

Own Kudos:

42,417

[2]

Given Kudos: 422

Status: enjoying

Location: India

WE:Education (Education)

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,264

Kudos: 42,417

[2]

03 Jan 2019, 07:21

Kudos

Bookmarks

GK

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

GK
Yes, it is used as a placeholder.

It is not a pronoun that can replace the noun vast regions since if you replace the word with 'vast region', you will see that the clause doesn't make any sense.

bharatmatta

Joined: 22 May 2016

Last visit: 09 Jan 2020

Posts: 1

Given Kudos: 9

Posts: 1

Kudos: 0

26 Jan 2019, 10:04

Kudos

Bookmarks

I rejected options with "one explanation" because the original sentence intends to say that 'a part of the reason is ...'. "One explanation" would mean that there are multiple potential explanations and one of them is.... Thoughts?

generis

Senior SC Moderator

Joined: 22 May 2016

Last visit: 18 Jun 2022

Posts: 5,273

Own Kudos:

37,384

[1]

Given Kudos: 9,464

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,273

Kudos: 37,384

[1]

26 Jan 2019, 12:10

Kudos

Bookmarks

blockman

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

bharatmatta

Hi bharatmatta , option A does not determine the original or intended meaning of the sentence.

The answer that is grammatically correct, logically sound, and rhetorically effective contains the intended meaning.

Option A incorrectly equates a characteristic of an artifact with the geographical and historical movement of people through real space.
An characteristic, similarity, is not the same as an event, the movement of people through space and time.

Answer D is grammatically and logically correct. Its meaning is the intended one.

That said, I started thinking about your distinction.
If I buy the premise that AN explanation is composed of internally consistent parts, then I agree:
"one explanation" [composed of internally consistent parts] does suggest multiple and inconsistent explanations, plural.
I also concede that if I buy your premise about what "explanation" means, a partial explanation and one explanation are not the same thing.

I am trying to remember an official question that tests with this much sophistication. I cannot remember one.

Now it is time for me to exit the Hall of Mirrors within whose walls stands the Tower of Babel populated by postmodern obscurantists.
(My head is spinning with what philosophers, linguists, scientists, scholars of English, and others would do with this distinction of yours.)

I hope that answer helps.

Cheryn

Joined: 11 Sep 2017

Last visit: 14 Aug 2019

Posts: 25

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 49

Posts: 25

Kudos: 51

[1]

19 Apr 2019, 20:08

Kudos

Bookmarks

1. usage of being in option B and option E , usage of be in opition A,
can any experts clear me the usage of words be and being in the context of above options especially in option E..
thanks in advance,

actually presence of these words takes few seconds more for me to analyse

2. as per abhimahna post on the usage of with i read those article also,
it states only two usages with can be used one to quote the result and other to state the subcomponent noun, as per that in option e usage is wrong,.. but i am not convinced, is the usage of with in option e wrong? if so kindly enlighten me on this.

3. verb ed or verb ing modifiers are adjective modifiers, similarly is usage of explainable in option C justified as adjective modifier? , whether we can use modifiers like that?

daagh

Major Poster

Joined: 19 Feb 2007

Last visit: 16 Oct 2020

Posts: 5,264

Own Kudos:

42,417

[1]

Given Kudos: 422

Status: enjoying

Location: India

WE:Education (Education)

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,264

Kudos: 42,417

[1]

19 Apr 2019, 23:30

Kudos

Bookmarks

Quote:

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

(E) Throughout a vast region, Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

Quote:

bharatmatta wrote:
I rejected options with "one explanation" because the original sentence intends to say that 'a part of the reason is ...'. "One explanation" would mean that there are multiple potential explanations and one of them is... Thoughts?

Whether that is one reason or a part reason or the only reason or one among the many reasons is not an issue here. It is more plausible that it is one among many other reasons. However, before one goes into such hair-splits and rejects those choices, it is necessary to see whether there are any other spontaneously visible errors in the choices.

Take for example,

B and E suffer from 'being' used as a modifier.
In the case of C, The sentence is an outright fragment. In addition, the idiom 'explainable as' is the spoilsport. "explainable by " the correct idiom in the context.
In the case of A, the idiom 'explained as' is wrong. --- "explained by " is the correct idiom.

Can we see why D is the only correct choice? IMHO, this is a sub-600 level question with hardly any compelling need for a discussion

The Take-Away: Grammar First and Then the Rest

snoep

Joined: 17 Jul 2014

Last visit: 01 Jan 2024

Posts: 150

Own Kudos:

175

Given Kudos: 320

Posts: 150

Kudos: 175

09 Nov 2019, 07:07

Kudos

Bookmarks

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Hi EMPOWERgmatVerbal
I was looking at 'with' modifier and I stumbled upon this qn.

Let's say we do add a comma - after dependent clause - throughout a vast region and consider this as a stand alone statement (not in context with other options)....Is the usage of 'with' correct? I also change latter part of the sentence to ignore any concerns with being. Is the use of 'With' good here to explain how they were remarkably similar.

Throughout a vast region, Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation that there was a rapid movement..

Official explanation for using 'with' is below
E This version is awkward, introducing the causal connection with the unnecessarily wordy and indirect string of prepositional phrases, with one explanation for this. . . .

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

EMPOWERgmat Instructor

Joined: 23 Feb 2015

Last visit: 17 Feb 2025

Posts: 1,694

Own Kudos:

15,175

Given Kudos: 766

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 1,694

Kudos: 15,175

11 Nov 2019, 16:51

Kudos

Bookmarks

snoep

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Hello snoep!

Great question! Yes, if we added in that comma I said was missing, the sentence would be technically grammatically correct. However, it is also incredibly awkward and overly wordy. Option D is far less wordy and confusing in its structure, so between the two D would still win out in the end.

I hope that helps! This was a difficult question for sure! Make sure to keep tagging me at EMPOWERgmatVerbal with your questions, and I'll be glad to help!

Pritishd

UNC Kenan Flagler Moderator

Joined: 18 Jul 2015

Last visit: 05 Jul 2025

Posts: 233

Own Kudos:

304

Given Kudos: 120

GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20 Verified score

WE:Analyst (Consumer Packaged Goods)

GMAT 1: 530 Q43 V20 Verified score

Posts: 233

Kudos: 304

27 Dec 2020, 06:23

Kudos

Bookmarks

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Hello Everyone!

Let's take a closer look at this question, since it appears that the original posting had to be updated at some point to fix typos. We'll look at each option and narrow it down to the right answer. To get started, here is the question with any major differences between each option highlighted in orange:

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as
(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is
(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as
(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was
(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

Right away, if we just read the orange parts in each option, we start to see some problems:

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

This answer is INCORRECT because it's saying that the similarity of Thule artifacts IS a rapid movement of people from one end of North American to another, which doesn't really make logical sense. It should say that the similarity is CAUSED BY a rapid movement of people. It's also not clear that this is only ONE explanation of many - it just says that this partly explains the similarity of artifacts.

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

This is INCORRECT because it's unclear what the subject of the sentence is. The phrase "Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region" needs a verb directly after it to work because it is acting like a subject here. "One explanation" is also acting as the subject. We can't have two subjects that are just stacked on top of each other like this, with nothing connecting them.

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

This is INCORRECT for the same reason as option A. If you read carefully, it says that the phenomenon of similar artifacts IS the movement of people, not that it was CAUSED BY a sudden movement of people. This doesn't make logical sense, so let's toss this option aside.

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was
This is CORRECT because it conveys the proper meaning (the movement of people is one explanation for finding similar artifacts in several places), and this is absolutely clear to readers. This isn't to say this option is perfectly grammatically correct - many of you took issue with the phrase "is that there was" being overly wordy. However, this is the best answer because it conveys its meaning the clearest - even if you could argue that you could cut a few words out.

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

This is INCORRECT because the first clause "Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar" is missing a comma after the word region.

There you have it - option D is the correct answer! This was a difficult question, for sure!

Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

EMPOWERgmatVerbal - I am unable to understand the explanation for option A.

How did you derive this part? I ask this because the original sentence mentions that the similarity can be explained and not that the similarity is

Quote:

This answer is INCORRECT because it's saying that the similarity of Thule artifacts IS a rapid movement of people from one end of North American to another, which doesn't really make logical sense

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

EMPOWERgmat Instructor

Joined: 23 Feb 2015

Last visit: 17 Feb 2025

Posts: 1,694

Own Kudos:

15,175

Given Kudos: 766

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 1,694

Kudos: 15,175

28 Dec 2020, 16:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

Pritishd

EMPOWERgmatVerbal

Quote:

This answer is INCORRECT because it's saying that the similarity of Thule artifacts IS a rapid movement of people from one end of North American to another, which doesn't really make logical sense

Thanks for your question Pritishd!

Saying the phrase "can be explained as" means the same thing as saying "is." If we were to replace the phrase "can be explained as" with "is," the sentence sounds illogical, so we can rule this option out.

We hope that helps!

Dinesh654

Joined: 08 Jun 2021

Last visit: 11 Aug 2024

Posts: 155

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 217

Status:In learning mode...

Location: India

GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27 Verified score

Products:

GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27 Verified score

Posts: 155

Kudos: 9

07 Jun 2022, 05:13

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hello experts,

I think the meaning changes when we say-in parts and one explanation.
It changes from- the reason is partially responsible- to- one of the explanation out of many or some explanations-

1. Right? Or their meaning is different from mine?

Hence I thought D is changing the meaning.
I was keeping original choice’s meaning as the right meaning.

2. Also, when as is used as a reason, doesn’t it require a clause?
The only clause after as is in choice D.

3. What’s wrong with choice B exactly?

ReedArnoldMPREP

Manhattan Prep Instructor

Joined: 30 Apr 2021

Last visit: 20 Dec 2024

Posts: 521

Own Kudos:

536

[1]

Given Kudos: 37

GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47 Verified score

Posts: 521

Kudos: 536

[1]

07 Jun 2022, 06:19

Kudos

Bookmarks

dcoolguy

1). I think "one explanation for X is..." and "X can be explained, in part, by..." to have essentially the same meaning. They both show that there are other things to consider for the 'effect,' but ONE of the causes of X is 'this thing.'

Note that 'meaning' isn't pulled from the 'original' sentence. Meaning is derived from the totality of the question.

2). 'as' sometimes requires a clause, if it's used as a conjunction. 'As' can also be a preposition to describe the 'role' of a noun. "I dressed as a pirate for the school play." "I worked as a waiter in college."

3). B has big structural issues. What is the first chunk of words (Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region) *doing?* It's just a floating noun-phrase ('Thule artifacts' and then a long modifier). It's not a subject, as there's no verb. It's not a modifier, because what is it modifying The explanation? The explanation is not a Thule artifact.

It's like B is *trying* to be a clause: "Thule artifacts ARE remarkably similar throughout a vast reason," but it isn't actually a clause.

1 2 3

Moderators:

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

7445 posts

GMATNinjaTwo

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

234 posts

miag

188 posts

Prep Toolkit

Announcements

Master in Management, Finance, Business Analytics and more Master’s Programs!

Solving 705+ Level MSR Questions with Data Synthesis Skils

Tuesday, Nov 18, 2025
10:30am NY / 3:30pm London / 9pm Mumbai

Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with ARINGO

Wednesday, November 19, 2025
09:00 am PDT | 10:30 pm IST
Location: GMAT Club Chat

Top GMAT Focus Debriefs

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards