The winds that howl across the Great Plains not only blow away valuabl

"Cause" is a verb here, so it could in theory be parallel to "blow." The main parallelism problem in C is with "they." Whatever comes after "but also" should match what came after "not only," so we want a verb, not a pronoun. As for "cause," the problem I see with it (other than that it should be accompanied by "to," as you said) is that using "damage" as a verb would be more direct. Why say "cause damage to" when we can just say "damage"?

In any case, that's the last thing I would look at on C. The other problems are much more glaring. What it comes down to is that C makes no sense, so depending on how we read it we will see different errors.

Very easy question...
not only X, but also Y... X and Y must be parallel.
So, the correct answer is D.

P.S. - I did this question in 26 seconds

The winds that howl across the Great Plains not only blow away valuable topsoil, thereby reducing the potential crop yield of a tract of land, but also damage or destroy young plants.

Correct answer is undoubtedly option (D)

AndrewN EducationAisle EMPOWERgmatRichC
I have 2 basic doubts.
1) If "cause" is a verb, then why E is wrong? In E, blow and causing maintain correct parallelism. I think D is more concise than E. Is my understanding correct?
2) Can we consider 2 different tense (blow and causing) parallel? As per my understanding, v-ing should be parallel to v-ing.

Thanks in advance.

Not sure I get your question. E does not use cause and hence it's wrong .


causing is a participle and participles do not necessarily have a tense associated with them.

For example:

Peter is causing pain.

Peter was causing pain.

Notice that both sentences use causing, but while the first sentence is in present, the second is in past. In other words, the presence of causing is not really determining the tense of the sentence.

If your question however, is that can the various parts of a parallel structure be in different tenses? Then the answer is yes. For example:

Peter was born poor but is now doing extremely well.

Here, the parallelism is:

Peter was...and is..

Hello, Sneha2021. I agree with what Ashish wrote above in response to your query. To follow up in my own way, I will add that I have seen zero cases in which a simple present verb, such as blow, has been considered parallel to its -ing counterpart when parallelism is being tested. It is better to play it safe and look for matching simple present verbs or participles. (Note that VERB-ing and VERB-ed phrases have appeared in parallel in a few tougher questions, but the majority of the time, VERB-ing goes with VERB-ing.)

Thank you for thinking to ask me, and good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

Hi Sneha2021,

With a quick scan of the Answers, we can immediately see 2 potential 'clues' as to what's going on in this SC:

First, the 'second half' of the phrase "not only.... but also" appears in some of the answers, so THAT phrase is something too look for in the construction of the sentence. Second, all 5 answers imply that we're dealing with a 2-part phrase of some kind, meaning that Parallelism will almost certainly be involved.

In the non-underlined portion of the sentence, we see "....not only...." so we can eliminate Answers A and B. The usage of the word "they" in Answer C is redundant (since the prompt is describing the various effects of the "The winds...."), so that Answer can also be eliminated. Between Answers D and E, we clearly have different Verb structures, so we just need to locate what we have to 'parallel' in the non-underlined portion; that's the word "...blow....", so Answer E is out.

Final Answer:

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

The original sentence has a parallelism issue because it uses "not only" without a corresponding "but also." To correct this, we need to make the sentence grammatically parallel. Let's evaluate the answer choices:

(A) and also damage or destroy

This option maintains the non-parallel structure. It should be "not only...but also," so this choice is incorrect.
(B) as well as damaging or destroying

This choice also fails to correct the parallelism issue. It uses "as well as" which is not parallel to "not only...but also." It should be "not only...but also," so this choice is incorrect.
(C) but they also cause damage or destroy

This option introduces the word "they," which is not necessary and makes the sentence wordy. Additionally, it uses "cause damage or destroy," which is not concise. It should be "not only...but also," so this choice is incorrect.
(D) but also damage or destroy

This choice correctly uses "but also" to create a parallel structure: "not only...but also." It also uses the concise "damage or destroy." This option is grammatically correct and clear.
(E) but also causing damage or destroying

This choice introduces the word "causing," which is not necessary and makes the sentence wordy. It should be "not only...but also," so this choice is incorrect.
The correct answer is (D):

"The winds that howl across the Great Plains not only blow away valuable topsoil but also damage or destroy young plants."