Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 26 Sep 2026, 21:56 |
It is currently 26 Sep 2026, 21:56 |
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 2807:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 28, 2026 - Oct. 16, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Sep 2911:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
" Description: Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thur Sept. 29, 2026 - Dec. 3, 2026, 11:00am-1:00pm EST
Oct 0107:00 AM BST
-08:00 AM GMT
Welcome to the GMAT Club's Free Interview Prep Event for Top MBA Programs! Buy tickets - Virtual series that’s all set to equip you to -excel in your MBA interviews.
Oct 0301:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Saturdays Oct. 3, 2026 - Dec. 26, 2026, 1:00pm-4:00pm EST
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
67% (01:25) correct
33%
(01:29)
wrong
based on 11520
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
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
(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
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.
(A) Meaning / Idiom
(B) Meaning
(C) Meaning / Idiom
(D) CORRECT
(E) Modifier / Meaning (with ... being)
(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.
12 Aug 2015, 20:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
A. The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as --- ‘explained as’ is wrong in the context it should be ‘explained by’
B. Thule artifacts being remarkable similar throughout a vast region (no verb), one explanation is—‘being remarkable’ used as modifier is not acceptable
C. That Thule artifacts are remarkable similar throughout a vast region, in part, explainable as – a fragment
D. One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts through a vast region is that there was – the best choice
E. Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkable similar, with one explanation for this being –
Remarkable similar – two adjectives in sequence is weird, it should be ‘remarkably similar’
B. Thule artifacts being remarkable similar throughout a vast region (no verb), one explanation is—‘being remarkable’ used as modifier is not acceptable
C. That Thule artifacts are remarkable similar throughout a vast region, in part, explainable as – a fragment
D. One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts through a vast region is that there was – the best choice
E. Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkable similar, with one explanation for this being –
Remarkable similar – two adjectives in sequence is weird, it should be ‘remarkably similar’
15 Dec 2015, 01:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
Vyshak
1. How can we generalize that ‘explained as’ is always incorrect in GMAT?. Everything is contextual, isn’t it? Here are some genuine examples of ‘explained as’ and ‘explained by’
The Tajmahal is explained as a monument of love and caring of a husband for his wife.
A Himalayan blunder can be explained as a blunder as great or tall as the Himalayas.
GMAT can be explained as a test of endurance and application
Examples for ‘explained by’
The cascading downfalls in the history of stock markets can be only explained by the investors’ bandwagon psychology
The reason behind the FIFA muddle can be explained by the venality some depraved souls.
2. One explanation need not be ‘one more explanation; It can also be ‘only one explanation’ . A meaning change is not a possibility in D, as far as I see.
1. How can we generalize that ‘explained as’ is always incorrect in GMAT?. Everything is contextual, isn’t it? Here are some genuine examples of ‘explained as’ and ‘explained by’
The Tajmahal is explained as a monument of love and caring of a husband for his wife.
A Himalayan blunder can be explained as a blunder as great or tall as the Himalayas.
GMAT can be explained as a test of endurance and application
Examples for ‘explained by’
The cascading downfalls in the history of stock markets can be only explained by the investors’ bandwagon psychology
The reason behind the FIFA muddle can be explained by the venality some depraved souls.
2. One explanation need not be ‘one more explanation; It can also be ‘only one explanation’ . A meaning change is not a possibility in D, as far as I see.
Updated on: 07 May 2019, 13:04
Originally posted by EMPOWERgmatVerbal on 30 Jul 2018, 16:45.
Last edited by EMPOWERgmatVerbal on 07 May 2019, 13:04, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by EMPOWERgmatVerbal on 07 May 2019, 13:04, edited 2 times in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
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.
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.
