The rules of differentiation allow a first-year calculus student to fi

Question

The rules of differentiation allow a first-year calculus student to find the derivative of any function, but the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written.

(A) the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written

(B) when you write an elementary function, it easily could be the case that the anti-derivative does not exist

(C) the non-existence of an anti-derivative occurs easily for some elementary functions

(D) if an elementary function is easy written, its anti-derivative does not exist

(E) it is easy to write an elementary function for which the anti-derivative does not exist

This SC question, about advanced math, is tricky. Among other issues, it explores the topic of phrases as the subject of clauses. For a discussion of this issue, as well as the OE for this particular question, see:
GMAT SC Grammar: Phrases as Subjects

Mike :-)

louwi · Accepted Answer

The rules of differentiation allow a first-year calculus student to find the derivative of any function, but  the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written .

(A) the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written .  "Where" is used for places only. "Does not exist often" is a wrong construction

(B) when you write an elementary function, it easily could be the case that the anti-derivative does not exist.  wordy, also" you" doesn't have an antecedent.

(C) the non-existence of an anti-derivative occurs easily for some elementary functions .  weird construction. Since the last sentence ends with the idea of finding afunction and the second sentence presents a contrast. It should begin with an idea concerning these functions

(D) if an elementary function is easy written, its anti-derivative does not exist  easy is wrong. Should be "easily"

(E) it is easy to write an elementary function for which the anti-derivative does exist .  correct. After "but" we need an independant clause. Nothing wrong in this sentence +concise and clear hence choice

warriorguy · Answer

My 2 cents:

I don't think I got it correct but my line of reasoning as below:-

Down to A and B because I feel somehow rest of the options alter the original meaning.

B:

when   you  write an elementary function,   it   easily could be the case that the anti-derivative does not exist

You? We are talking about first year calculus students. Shouldn't we include third person pronoun? Also, antecedent of 'it' seems to be bit dicey - could be function or derivative.

A:

the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases  where  an elementary function is easily written

Somehow 'where' seems problematic to me. Based on what I read - to describe a situation we would need 'in which' rather than 'where'

But i chose A as it seemed better than other options.

Kurtosis · Answer

Meaning: Derivative exists for any function but anti derivative does not exist for a easily written function.

(A) the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written - Incorrect. 'where' can only be used to refer a place.

(B) when you write an elementary function, it easily could be the case that the anti-derivative does not exist - Incorrect. Change in meaning.

(C) the non-existence of an anti-derivative occurs easily for some elementary functions - Incorrect. Change in meaning.

(D) if an elementary function is easy written, its anti-derivative does not exist - Correct.

(E) it is easy to write an elementary function for which the anti-derivative does not exist - Incorrect. Change in meaning.

IMO answer is D.

warriorguy · Answer

Doesn't D change the meaning. D states its true for all cases. But there could be some cases for which there does exist anti-derivative - (This would prove my math skills are non-existent)

Kurtosis · Answer

According to D, anti derivative does not exist if a function is easy written. D does not state that anti derivative does not exist at all. So, D appears to have the same meaning as that of the original sentence.

hotshot02 · Answer

It was down to A and E for me. I chose E as it is in active voice.

sandeepb17 · Answer

I don't know y everybody gives two cents only when we got 5 options.
Here,
Q I'm giving my 5 cents.... 1 for each option. ??

I chose A, even though "where" is doubtful for me.
B. We need independent clause after "but". Hence rejected this option.
C. The construction is awkward as it makes "non existence" subject. 
Also i have a doubt regarding sentences with structure verb+adverb. Is this structure ok??? Please clarify that...
D. "...easy written... " adjective+verb 
Nothing more to add.
E. What is antecedent of "it"??
Ambiguous. Hence, rejected.

Left with option A.
Mikemcgarry, please correct if I'm wrong in my logic. 
Thank you.

Sent from my D6502 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Abhishek009 · Answer

IMHO with active voice (E), errors in other options ( According to me ) are highlighted in red

winionhi · Answer

Vyshak  .. I believe D changes the meaning, in that it says that every easily written elementary function doesn't have an anti-derivative. 
But, "A" says that it only "often" doesn't exist, meaning that there could at least be 1 easily written elementary function for which an anti-derivative exists.

I was able to drill down to A and E, and as you pointed out the "where" in A has to refer to a place, I pick  E

warriorguy · Answer

Hi  Abhishek009 ,

Isn't 'but' used to express a contrast? In option E, rules allow x, but it is easy to find Y. Doesn't sound correct to my ears. Also, can we use 'it' as a placeholder here - in second part of the sentence? Logically it should refer to rules? if yes, then mismatch - Else 'it' refers to function or derivative too to match numbers.

warriorguy · Answer

Hi Mike,

Request you to provide the OE

Mahmud6 · Answer

mikemcgarry

Dear friend, Mike

After gone through the explanation given in the above link, I have a confusion whether the OA changes the meaning.

In original sentence, the focus is on the ' existence  of the anti-derivative', whereas in OA, the focus is shifted to the ' writing  of elementary function'. 
Am I wrong in my reasoning? Please, help me out.

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  Mahmud6  ,

Change in meaning is allowed when we do not have the correct answer choice that maintains the original meaning.

A, B, C and D are grammatically incorrect. Hence, we need to go with option E, even though it changes the meaning.

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Mahmud6 & abhimahna , Here are the two versions: (A) . . . but the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases where an elementary function is easily written . (E) . . . it is easy to write an elementary function for which the anti-derivative does exist . There is absolutely no change in meaning between these two . My friends, with all due respect, I think it is extremely hard for non-native speakers to judge change in meaning from different wordings, because two very different wording may have the exact same meaning for native English speakers. The focus of version (E) is not penmanship, not the act of writing itself. Both versions are saying that many simple elementary functions don't have anti-derivatives. Every simple function has a derivative, but not every simple function has an anti-derivative: that's the core comparison in the whole sentence. I also don't like the statement: " Change in meaning is allowed when we do not have the correct answer choice that maintains the original meaning ." I don't believe this represents the best guide to follow. It is much better to recognize that meaning is extremely subtle, not to be underestimated, and can never be captured by purely literalist readings. Do not underestimate what it is to understand the meaning of a language--what it means to native English speakers. A non-native speaker gets to that level only by a sustained and diligent habit of reading English, over and above ordinary GMAT preparations. Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

Mahmud6 · Answer

mikemcgarry

Dear Mike

My friend, please allow me to express my understanding. 
The sentences seem to me a little bit conditional. The conditional version is mentioned below:

(A) . . .  the anti-derivative does not exist often in cases IF an elementary function is easily written .
(E) . . .  it is easy to write an elementary function IF the anti-derivative does exist .

In A the condition is 'easily written elementary function' whereas in E the condition is shifted to 'the existence of anti-derivative'. This seems to me unusual .

I beg your pardon if I am not smart enough.

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Mahmud6 , I'm happy to respond. :-)

The sentences are NOT conditionals at all. Putting the word " if " into each sentence completely changes their meanings to something unrecognizable. Neither sentence means anything close to what it originally meant once the word " if " has been inserted. The conditional forms here have nothing close to the original meaning. Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

Mo2men · Answer

Dear Mike,

I hope you are well.

I have 2 questions for choice B:

1 - Is the place of adverb 'easily' correct? Isn't better placed after 'could' or after 'be'? It may not be the case to reject the choice but it is subtle question to learn more.

2- I actually reject the sentence because of its awkward structure ' when you ........'. It seems to me more colloquial English that heavily used by people or non-native speaker when they insert a pronoun form no where. Am I correct in my analysis for this point?

Thanks in advance

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Mo2men , How are you, my friend? I'm happy to respond. :-)

1) This is an old-fashioned somewhat out-of-date rule, but it used to be considered a mark of well-spoken English not to interrupt a verb with an adverb, when possible. Obviously, the word " not " has to come between the auxiliary verbs and the main verb. If there's any choice about the placement of the adverb, the older preference would be for the adverb not to interrupt the verb. The GMAT SC still follows this pattern sometimes, but it does not adhere to it strictly, and it certainly would not be the basis of right/wrong on the SC question. The placement of " easily " in (B) actually follows this older pattern of formal writing. It doesn't sound right only because this rule fallen into complete neglect, especially in common speech. 2) Yes, the " when you " structure for a conditional is very colloquial and does not withstand serious logical scrutiny. That is the strongest reason for which we can reject (B). Does this make sense? Mike :-)

Mpuneet · Answer

A – Where is only supposed to be used for places
B – This option is much too wordy
C – ‘the non-existence’ is awkward wording
D – Wrong word applied, easy should be easily
E – This one has no errors- Correct Option

The rules of differentiation allow a first-year calculus student to fi

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 rules of differentiation allow a first-year calculus student to fi

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