GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 16 Oct 2019, 07:28

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

Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3544
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 10:25
3
1
34
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

38% (01:57) correct 62% (01:43) wrong based on 554 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of


The best or excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.

_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.




Choose life.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3544
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 14:43
7
1
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)

[/b]


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

OFFICIAL ANSWER

My annotations are in blue typeface.

• While it is tempting to compare things of the same kind (towns to towns) we must make sure that not only the noun, but also the verb is properly compared.

• In this case, since the town [of Ebchester] has been “’discovered,” and since we are looking for a comparison of contrast (unlike),
it makes sense to compare [the discovered town of Ebchester] to something that has remained unfound—the fort of Vindomora in answers (B) and (E).

• B is grammatically awkward; is built the fort is inverted, and the entire final dependent clause is a stylistic and rhetorical mess.

• The answer is E

COMMENTS

This question is instructive. I had a comparatively hard time with it until I shifted gears.

(1) METHOD: Find the meaning. Grammatical error analysis will not help much.

Trying to find grammatical errors in isolation will not work in this question.
All of the answers except D are arguably correct in a grammatical sense.
as Mahmoudfawzy83 (welcome!) noted
I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.

(2) METHOD: Compare similar answer to similar answer.
Such comparison often will make the better sentence clear,
and from that clarity we can examine the "better" parts.

(3) STRATEGY: In the same way that I urge people to stay laser-focused on the conclusion in CR,
this question demonstrates that we need to stay laser-focused on the logic of UNLIKE, and that
we need to look for logical clues (discussed below) that can help us choose an answer with contrast.

• Clarification about the phrase "comparison of contrast."
The phrase "a comparison of contrast" just means that we are looking for "contrast."
-- A rather heated debate exists about defining contrast as different from compare.
Many North American students (don't know about Europe) see essay questions in which the
prompt is "compare and contrast" the _____ .

-- the phrasing in this answer is used because the author is in the "contrast is a subset of compare" camp (as am I)
We can compare the similarities.
We can compare the differences. (Hence, unlike.)

This page explains the issue,
some posters point out that both Oxford and Collins dictionaries include "contrast" in the definition of "compare."

• Approach?

• Find cue words in the non-underlined part.

I focused on two items, unlike and the fort

• Unlike?
Level 1 - the town of Ebchester is different from many other towns.
Other towns ["discovered"] were built near cemetaries.
Ebchester was built on top of a fort.
Okay, the towns' location is a difference, but we have two problems.
One, Ebchester is also LIKE the other towns because it, too, has been discovered.
Two, why does this question include some buried fort? Is it visible or not?

Level 2 - Find the split: Is the fort visible, or not?

• Split: A, B, C, and D (fort is barely visible) vs. E (fort is not discovered)

-- I think that the OE incorrectly suggests that (E) and (B) show about the same level of contrast, that both correctly depict the fort as different from the discovered town of Ebchester. (See my analysis below.)

I see a different split, not 2-3 (EB-ACD), but rather 1-4 (E-ABCD)

A, B, C, and D all contain information that the fort is hard to see.
E says that the fort has not been discovered.
But I am troubled. I am not convinced that we should be comparing anything to the fort.

• Pick the best of A, B, C, and D
Options C and D are rhetorical disasters.

D) has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora
-- not grammatical: "little remains" suggests that the remains themselves are small.
-- not grammatical: "seen" is wrong. . . . remains that can be seen would fix that issue.
-- not stylistically defensible
a town "has" (verb) "little remains seen" (object) is almost incomprehensible.
Compare to A and B. Both are better.
A) states: thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort. That phrasing is correct.
B) the fort . . . can hardly be seen. That phrasing is correct.

At the least, A and B are better than D.

C is awful, too. . .. that which can be seen [of the fort] is scarce . . .
-- wrong adjective. Scarce implies "not enough" [to meet some expectation or demand]
-- not always, but usually GMAC prefers the pronoun "what" to the phrase "that which"
-- C is not as good as A or B

Eliminate C and D.

• A, B, and E
-- This part is hard. Stylistically, A and E are better than B.
-- But I still have my logical problem: which answer shows contrast best or stays most consistent with UNLIKE?

• Logic
I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it is also like other towns because it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is different only, not both different and similar.

Eliminate A.

• B or E?
-- B and E both begin with "fort."
-- But (B) mentions that the fort "can hardly be seen."
-- (E) says that the fort is unfound.

Unfound is the opposite of discovered. That contrast is stronger than the contrast words in (B).

Answer E it is

***
I am very impressed by the people who posted.
There is no correct answer, although I think that some of the analysis
in each post is important. All of the posters demonstrate
exactly what I had to fight: getting caught up in noun comparison
is a distraction.

Today is the first day of SC Butler that I have not awarded kudos.
But I am happy: four very smart people just showed us
ways of approaching this kind of question that did NOT work.
Knowing what does not work is just as important as knowing what does.

Many thanks to Mahmoudfawzy83 , Darshi04 , Prateekj05 , and Mudit27021988

Holiday season has arrived where I live. Happy Holidays!
_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.




Choose life.
General Discussion
Director
Director
User avatar
V
Status: Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2018
Posts: 673
Location: Egypt
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
GPA: 3.67
WE: Pharmaceuticals (Health Care)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 12:17
1
1
I think (A) is the the right answer because the initial part "Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, ... " infers that the following sentences would be talking about a 'town' .. not a fort or a province.

I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.
_________________
Thanks for Kudos
Manager
Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 28 Nov 2017
Posts: 138
Location: India
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 15:22
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of


The best or excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.


Meaning analysis:
There is a town called Ebchester which was built directly on top of a fort called Vindomora unlike other Roman towns which are generally situated at a little distance from the burial sites. [I believe successor here refers to towns].

So effectively, successors of many Roman towns will also be towns. And a town can only be compared to another town to make the meaning logical.
The original sentence seems alright as it is.
In other options, the town is compared to either the fort (Options B and D) or the province of lower Britain (option D). In option C, "that which" is incorrect.
Answer should be option A.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 08 Oct 2018
Posts: 64
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Brand Management (Health Care)
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 16:44
1
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of



Nice question.

Meaning analysis
Successors of many Roman towns are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites. Not much of Vindomora fort is visible today because Ebchester town was built directly above the fort. Ebchester town is in Lower Britain, which is the town's successor.

Statement clearly says that Roman towns were buried and their successors (a place, province, etc.) are discovered just little above the town (making the town much visible).
However, in case of Great Britain Province (successor), the town is visible because it was just at a short distance below the successor, but not much of the fort is visible because the fort was even below the town (town was built on top of the fort).

Remember: Town is below successor. Fort is below town.

Process of Elimination:

Choice A has a misplaced noun as "Unlike successors..." should modify a successor and not a town.
The thought process of choosing A because a successor is not clearly mentioned is incorrect IMO, as a province can be a successor of a town and it has been mentioned that the town is in the province of Lower Britain. Hence, the correct noun after comma is "the province of Lower Britain".
Incorrect.

Notice that only D has this choice.
Eliminate B, E
Choice C needs a noun after the first comma. Eliminate C.

Choice D: As per our meaning analysis, "The province of Lower Britain" is the successor of the town and therefore is correctly modified by the clause "unlike the successors of many Roman towns". Also, "built" correctly modifies the "town of Ebchester".
This goes well with our meaning. Town had a successor. Hence today town and successor visible. Town built directly above fort, hence but much of fort visible.

Hence, D
_________________
We learn permanently when we teach,
We grow infinitely when we share.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Nov 2016
Posts: 160
Location: India
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 23:17
Darshi04 wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of



Nice question.

Meaning analysis
Successors of many Roman towns are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites. Not much of Vindomora fort is visible today because Ebchester town was built directly above the fort. Ebchester town is in Lower Britain, which is the town's successor.

Statement clearly says that Roman towns were buried and their successors (a place, province, etc.) are discovered just little above the town (making the town much visible).
However, in case of Great Britain Province (successor), the town is visible because it was just at a short distance below the successor, but not much of the fort is visible because the fort was even below the town (town was built on top of the fort).

Remember: Town is below successor. Fort is below town.

Process of Elimination:

Choice A has a misplaced noun as "Unlike successors..." should modify a successor and not a town.
The thought process of choosing A because a successor is not clearly mentioned is incorrect IMO, as a province can be a successor of a town and it has been mentioned that the town is in the province of Lower Britain. Hence, the correct noun after comma is "the province of Lower Britain".
Incorrect.

Notice that only D has this choice.
Eliminate B, E
Choice C needs a noun after the first comma. Eliminate C.

Choice D: As per our meaning analysis, "The province of Lower Britain" is the successor of the town and therefore is correctly modified by the clause "unlike the successors of many Roman towns". Also, "built" correctly modifies the "town of Ebchester".
This goes well with our meaning. Town had a successor. Hence today town and successor visible. Town built directly above fort, hence but much of fort visible.

Hence, D


I think it's not the province that is compared to the the successors. Ebchester is a town that very well succeeds the fort and is compared to other successors. Ebchester is a town in the province of lower Britain.

I think A should be correct.

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 08 Oct 2018
Posts: 64
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Brand Management (Health Care)
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 11:00
Mudit27021988 wrote:
Darshi04 wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of



Nice question.

Meaning analysis
Successors of many Roman towns are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites. Not much of Vindomora fort is visible today because Ebchester town was built directly above the fort. Ebchester town is in Lower Britain, which is the town's successor.

Statement clearly says that Roman towns were buried and their successors (a place, province, etc.) are discovered just little above the town (making the town much visible).
However, in case of Great Britain Province (successor), the town is visible because it was just at a short distance below the successor, but not much of the fort is visible because the fort was even below the town (town was built on top of the fort).

Remember: Town is below successor. Fort is below town.

Process of Elimination:

Choice A has a misplaced noun as "Unlike successors..." should modify a successor and not a town.
The thought process of choosing A because a successor is not clearly mentioned is incorrect IMO, as a province can be a successor of a town and it has been mentioned that the town is in the province of Lower Britain. Hence, the correct noun after comma is "the province of Lower Britain".
Incorrect.

Notice that only D has this choice.
Eliminate B, E
Choice C needs a noun after the first comma. Eliminate C.

Choice D: As per our meaning analysis, "The province of Lower Britain" is the successor of the town and therefore is correctly modified by the clause "unlike the successors of many Roman towns". Also, "built" correctly modifies the "town of Ebchester".
This goes well with our meaning. Town had a successor. Hence today town and successor visible. Town built directly above fort, hence but much of fort visible.

Hence, D


I think it's not the province that is compared to the the successors. Ebchester is a town that very well succeeds the fort and is compared to other successors. Ebchester is a town in the province of lower Britain.

I think A should be correct.

Posted from my mobile device


It seems we both are wrong. :)
This was a humbling question.

Didn't catch that question is talking about discovery of successor of the town, found just above the town.
Fort was unfound because it was built below the town (i.e town above it).
The province is just a distraction!

Boy how these questions give me sleepless nights, and they're worth it!
_________________
We learn permanently when we teach,
We grow infinitely when we share.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 08 Oct 2018
Posts: 64
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Brand Management (Health Care)
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 15:27
1
generis wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)

[/b]


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

OFFICIAL ANSWER

My annotations are in blue typeface.

• While it is tempting to compare things of the same kind (towns to towns) we must make sure that not only the noun, but also the verb is properly compared.

• In this case, since the town [of Ebchester] has been “’discovered,” and since we are looking for a comparison of contrast (unlike),
it makes sense to compare [the discovered town of Ebchester] to something that has remained unfound—the fort of Vindomora in answers (B) and (E).

• B is grammatically awkward; is built the fort is inverted, and the entire final dependent clause is a stylistic and rhetorical mess.

Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built the fort.

• The answer is E

COMMENTS

This question is instructive. I had a comparatively hard time with it until I shifted gears.

(1) METHOD: Find the meaning. Grammatical error analysis will not help much.

Trying to find grammatical errors in isolation will not work in this question.
All of the answers are arguably correct in a grammatical sense.
as Mahmoudfawzy83 (welcome!) noted
I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.

(2) METHOD: Compare similar answer to similar answer.
Such comparison often will make the better sentence clear,
and from that clarity we can examine the "better" parts.

(3) STRATEGY: In the same way that I urge people to stay laser-focused on the conclusion in CR,
this question demonstrates that we need to stay laser-focused on the logic of UNLIKE, and that
we need to look for logical clues (discussed below) that can help us choose an answer with contrast.

• Clarification about the phrase "comparison of contrast."
The phrase "a comparison of contrast" just means that we are looking for "contrast."
-- A rather heated debate exists about defining contrast as different from compare.
Many North American students (don't know about Europe) see essay questions in which the
prompt is "compare and contrast" the _____ .

-- the phrasing in this answer is used because the author is in the "contrast is a subset of compare" camp (as am I)
We can compare the similarities.
We can compare the differences. (Hence, unlike.)

This page explains the issue,
some posters point out that both Oxford and Collins dictionaries include "contrast" in the definition of "compare."

• Stats
At the moment, the stats on this question are:
67% chose A
4% chose B
0 chose C
4% chose D
25% chose E

• Approach?

• Find cue words in the non-underlined part.

I focused on two items, unlike and the fort

• Unlike?
Level 1 - the town of Ebchester is different from many other towns.
Other towns ["discovered"] were built near cemetaries.
Ebchester was built on top of a fort.
Okay, that's a difference, but we have two problems.
One, Ebchester is LIKE the other towns because it, too, has been discovered.
Two, why does this question include some buried fort? Is it visible or not?

Level 2 - Find the split: Is the fort visible, or not?

• Split: A, B, C, and D (fort is barely visible) vs. E (fort is not discovered)

-- I think that the OE incorrectly suggests that (E) and (B) show about the same level of contrast, that both correctly depict the fort as different from the discovered town of Ebchester. (See my analysis below.)

I see a different split, not 2-3 (EB-ACD), but rather 1-4 (E-ABCD)

A, B, C, and D all contain information that the fort is hard to see.
E says that the fort has not been discovered.
But I am troubled. I am not convinced that we should be comparing anything to the fort.

• Pick the best of A, B, C, and D
Options C and D are rhetorical disasters.

D) has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora
-- not grammatical: "little remains" suggests that the remains themselves are small.
-- not grammatical: "seen" is the wrong adjective. "Visible" is what "seen" is supposed to convey,
but seen implies a witness. "Can be seen" would fix that issue.
-- not stylistically defensible
a town "has" (verb) "little remains seen" (object) is almost incomprehensible.
Compare to A and B. Both are better.
A) states: thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort. That phrasing is correct.
B) the fort . . . can hardly be seen. That phrasing is correct.

At the least, A and B are better than D.

C is awful, too. . .. that which can be seen [of the fort] is scarce . . .
-- wrong adjective. Scarce implies "not enough" [to meet some expectation or demand]
-- not always, but usually GMAC prefers the pronoun "what" to the phrase "that which"
-- C is not as good as A or B

Eliminate C and D.

• A, B, and E
-- This part is hard. Stylistically, A and E are better than B.
-- But I still have my logical problem: which answer shows contrast best or stays most consistent with UNLIKE?

• Logic
I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is just different.

Eliminate A.

• B or E?
-- B and E both begin with "fort."
-- But (B) mentions that the fort "can hardly be seen."
-- (E) says that the fort is unfound.

Unfound is the opposite of discovered. That contrast is stronger than the contrast words in (B).

Answer E it is

If you do agree with the author of the OE that B and E must be chosen from style, diction, and rhetorical angles,
the OE author is correct.

Rewrite of B:
. . . . sites, the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen
because the town of Ebchester is built directly on top of the fort. [as in C and E]

I am very impressed by the people who posted.
There is no correct answer, although I think that some of the analysis
in each post is important. All of the posters demonstrate
exactly what I had to fight: getting caught up in noun comparison
is a distraction.

Today is the first day of SC Butler that I have not awarded kudos.
But I am happy: four very smart people just showed us
ways of approaching this kind of question that did NOT work.
Knowing what does not work is just as important as knowing what does.

Many thanks to Mudit27021988 , Darshi04 , Prateekj05 , and Mudit27021988

Holiday season has arrived where I live. Happy Holidays!


generis
Incredible explanation through detailed and logical commentary. The question itself was so good that it warranted a healthy discussion.
Thank you for the inspiration, support and effort for such a detailed explanation!

Happy holidays! :)
_________________
We learn permanently when we teach,
We grow infinitely when we share.
Manager
Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 28 Nov 2017
Posts: 138
Location: India
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 16:14
1
generis wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)

[/b]


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

OFFICIAL ANSWER

My annotations are in blue typeface.

• While it is tempting to compare things of the same kind (towns to towns) we must make sure that not only the noun, but also the verb is properly compared.

• In this case, since the town [of Ebchester] has been “’discovered,” and since we are looking for a comparison of contrast (unlike),
it makes sense to compare [the discovered town of Ebchester] to something that has remained unfound—the fort of Vindomora in answers (B) and (E).

• B is grammatically awkward; is built the fort is inverted, and the entire final dependent clause is a stylistic and rhetorical mess.

• The answer is E

COMMENTS

This question is instructive. I had a comparatively hard time with it until I shifted gears.

(1) METHOD: Find the meaning. Grammatical error analysis will not help much.

Trying to find grammatical errors in isolation will not work in this question.
All of the answers except D are arguably correct in a grammatical sense.
as Mahmoudfawzy83 (welcome!) noted
I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.

(2) METHOD: Compare similar answer to similar answer.
Such comparison often will make the better sentence clear,
and from that clarity we can examine the "better" parts.

(3) STRATEGY: In the same way that I urge people to stay laser-focused on the conclusion in CR,
this question demonstrates that we need to stay laser-focused on the logic of UNLIKE, and that
we need to look for logical clues (discussed below) that can help us choose an answer with contrast.

• Clarification about the phrase "comparison of contrast."
The phrase "a comparison of contrast" just means that we are looking for "contrast."
-- A rather heated debate exists about defining contrast as different from compare.
Many North American students (don't know about Europe) see essay questions in which the
prompt is "compare and contrast" the _____ .

-- the phrasing in this answer is used because the author is in the "contrast is a subset of compare" camp (as am I)
We can compare the similarities.
We can compare the differences. (Hence, unlike.)

This page explains the issue,
some posters point out that both Oxford and Collins dictionaries include "contrast" in the definition of "compare."

• Stats
At the moment, the stats on this question are:
67% chose A
4% chose B
0 chose C
4% chose D
25% chose E

• Approach?

• Find cue words in the non-underlined part.

I focused on two items, unlike and the fort

• Unlike?
Level 1 - the town of Ebchester is different from many other towns.
Other towns ["discovered"] were built near cemetaries.
Ebchester was built on top of a fort.
Okay, that's a difference, but we have two problems.
One, Ebchester is LIKE the other towns because it, too, has been discovered.
Two, why does this question include some buried fort? Is it visible or not?

Level 2 - Find the split: Is the fort visible, or not?

• Split: A, B, C, and D (fort is barely visible) vs. E (fort is not discovered)

-- I think that the OE incorrectly suggests that (E) and (B) show about the same level of contrast, that both correctly depict the fort as different from the discovered town of Ebchester. (See my analysis below.)

I see a different split, not 2-3 (EB-ACD), but rather 1-4 (E-ABCD)

A, B, C, and D all contain information that the fort is hard to see.
E says that the fort has not been discovered.
But I am troubled. I am not convinced that we should be comparing anything to the fort.

• Pick the best of A, B, C, and D
Options C and D are rhetorical disasters.

D) has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora
-- not grammatical: "little remains" suggests that the remains themselves are small.
-- not grammatical: "seen" is the wrong adjective. "Visible" is what "seen" is supposed to convey,
but seen implies a witness. "Can be seen" would fix that issue.
-- not stylistically defensible
a town "has" (verb) "little remains seen" (object) is almost incomprehensible.
Compare to A and B. Both are better.
A) states: thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort. That phrasing is correct.
B) the fort . . . can hardly be seen. That phrasing is correct.

At the least, A and B are better than D.

C is awful, too. . .. that which can be seen [of the fort] is scarce . . .
-- wrong adjective. Scarce implies "not enough" [to meet some expectation or demand]
-- not always, but usually GMAC prefers the pronoun "what" to the phrase "that which"
-- C is not as good as A or B

Eliminate C and D.

• A, B, and E
-- This part is hard. Stylistically, A and E are better than B.
-- But I still have my logical problem: which answer shows contrast best or stays most consistent with UNLIKE?

• Logic
I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is different only, not both different and similar.

Eliminate A.

• B or E?
-- B and E both begin with "fort."
-- But (B) mentions that the fort "can hardly be seen."
-- (E) says that the fort is unfound.

Unfound is the opposite of discovered. That contrast is stronger than the contrast words in (B).

Answer E it is

If you do agree with the author of the OE that B and E must be chosen from style, diction, and rhetorical angles,
the OE author is correct.

Rewrite of B:
. . . . sites, the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen
because the town of Ebchester is built directly on top of the fort. [as in C and E]

I am very impressed by the people who posted.
There is no correct answer, although I think that some of the analysis
in each post is important. All of the posters demonstrate
exactly what I had to fight: getting caught up in noun comparison
is a distraction.

Today is the first day of SC Butler that I have not awarded kudos.
But I am happy: four very smart people just showed us
ways of approaching this kind of question that did NOT work.
Knowing what does not work is just as important as knowing what does.

Many thanks to Mahmoudfawzy83 , Darshi04 , Prateekj05 , and Mudit27021988

Holiday season has arrived where I live. Happy Holidays!



Thank you generis for the wonderful explanation. It's always good to learn something new. Glad you posted this question!

Happy Holidays! :)
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Nov 2016
Posts: 160
Location: India
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Unlike the successor of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 20:49
generis wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)

[/b]


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

OFFICIAL ANSWER

My annotations are in blue typeface.

• While it is tempting to compare things of the same kind (towns to towns) we must make sure that not only the noun, but also the verb is properly compared.

• In this case, since the town [of Ebchester] has been “’discovered,” and since we are looking for a comparison of contrast (unlike),
it makes sense to compare [the discovered town of Ebchester] to something that has remained unfound—the fort of Vindomora in answers (B) and (E).

• B is grammatically awkward; is built the fort is inverted, and the entire final dependent clause is a stylistic and rhetorical mess.

• The answer is E

COMMENTS

This question is instructive. I had a comparatively hard time with it until I shifted gears.

(1) METHOD: Find the meaning. Grammatical error analysis will not help much.

Trying to find grammatical errors in isolation will not work in this question.
All of the answers except D are arguably correct in a grammatical sense.
as Mahmoudfawzy83 (welcome!) noted
I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.

(2) METHOD: Compare similar answer to similar answer.
Such comparison often will make the better sentence clear,
and from that clarity we can examine the "better" parts.

(3) STRATEGY: In the same way that I urge people to stay laser-focused on the conclusion in CR,
this question demonstrates that we need to stay laser-focused on the logic of UNLIKE, and that
we need to look for logical clues (discussed below) that can help us choose an answer with contrast.

• Clarification about the phrase "comparison of contrast."
The phrase "a comparison of contrast" just means that we are looking for "contrast."
-- A rather heated debate exists about defining contrast as different from compare.
Many North American students (don't know about Europe) see essay questions in which the
prompt is "compare and contrast" the _____ .

-- the phrasing in this answer is used because the author is in the "contrast is a subset of compare" camp (as am I)
We can compare the similarities.
We can compare the differences. (Hence, unlike.)

This page explains the issue,
some posters point out that both Oxford and Collins dictionaries include "contrast" in the definition of "compare."

• Stats
At the moment, the stats on this question are:
67% chose A
4% chose B
0 chose C
4% chose D
25% chose E

• Approach?

• Find cue words in the non-underlined part.

I focused on two items, unlike and the fort

• Unlike?
Level 1 - the town of Ebchester is different from many other towns.
Other towns ["discovered"] were built near cemetaries.
Ebchester was built on top of a fort.
Okay, that's a difference, but we have two problems.
One, Ebchester is LIKE the other towns because it, too, has been discovered.
Two, why does this question include some buried fort? Is it visible or not?

Level 2 - Find the split: Is the fort visible, or not?

• Split: A, B, C, and D (fort is barely visible) vs. E (fort is not discovered)

-- I think that the OE incorrectly suggests that (E) and (B) show about the same level of contrast, that both correctly depict the fort as different from the discovered town of Ebchester. (See my analysis below.)

I see a different split, not 2-3 (EB-ACD), but rather 1-4 (E-ABCD)

A, B, C, and D all contain information that the fort is hard to see.
E says that the fort has not been discovered.
But I am troubled. I am not convinced that we should be comparing anything to the fort.

• Pick the best of A, B, C, and D
Options C and D are rhetorical disasters.

D) has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora
-- not grammatical: "little remains" suggests that the remains themselves are small.
-- not grammatical: "seen" is the wrong adjective. "Visible" is what "seen" is supposed to convey,
but seen implies a witness. "Can be seen" would fix that issue.
-- not stylistically defensible
a town "has" (verb) "little remains seen" (object) is almost incomprehensible.
Compare to A and B. Both are better.
A) states: thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort. That phrasing is correct.
B) the fort . . . can hardly be seen. That phrasing is correct.

At the least, A and B are better than D.

C is awful, too. . .. that which can be seen [of the fort] is scarce . . .
-- wrong adjective. Scarce implies "not enough" [to meet some expectation or demand]
-- not always, but usually GMAC prefers the pronoun "what" to the phrase "that which"
-- C is not as good as A or B

Eliminate C and D.

• A, B, and E
-- This part is hard. Stylistically, A and E are better than B.
-- But I still have my logical problem: which answer shows contrast best or stays most consistent with UNLIKE?

• Logic
I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is different only, not both different and similar.

Eliminate A.

• B or E?
-- B and E both begin with "fort."
-- But (B) mentions that the fort "can hardly be seen."
-- (E) says that the fort is unfound.

Unfound is the opposite of discovered. That contrast is stronger than the contrast words in (B).

Answer E it is

If you do agree with the author of the OE that B and E must be chosen from style, diction, and rhetorical angles,
the OE author is correct.

Rewrite of B:
. . . . sites, the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen
because the town of Ebchester is built directly on top of the fort. [as in C and E]

I am very impressed by the people who posted.
There is no correct answer, although I think that some of the analysis
in each post is important. All of the posters demonstrate
exactly what I had to fight: getting caught up in noun comparison
is a distraction.

Today is the first day of SC Butler that I have not awarded kudos.
But I am happy: four very smart people just showed us
ways of approaching this kind of question that did NOT work.
Knowing what does not work is just as important as knowing what does.

Many thanks to Mahmoudfawzy83 , Darshi04 , Prateekj05 , and Mudit27021988

Holiday season has arrived where I live. Happy Holidays!


Hi . Can someone let please explain the meaning of the sentence.

This is what I understood.

The Roman towns=> were succeeded by something (town, place)
Generally the succeeding places were built close to the burial site (i.e the site where the previous roman towns existed or were burried).

Since the succeeding places were close to the burial site ( and not on top of it) The burial sites were visible.

However in the case of ebchester, the town was built directly over the fort ( assuming it is being compared to the Roman towns that got burried). As ebchester was built above the fort, the fort was not visible.

Would appreciate some help here .

Tagging experts daagh egmat
Thanks

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 May 2018
Posts: 32
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 22:37
@daagh@GMATNinja Can you please explain this question.Why A is wrong and E is correct?
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2400
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2019, 21:03
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)


For SC butler Questions Click Here


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of


The best or excellent answers get kudos, which will be awarded after the answer is revealed.


AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , MagooshExpert , GMATGuruNY , VeritasPrepBrian , MartyMurray , other experts - please provide a solution for this question
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Nov 2017
Posts: 68
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jan 2019, 12:11
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

This was tough, it took me 2 and half minute. The problem here is that the meaning of the sentence is not perfectly clear from the first sentence, and it is a little bit hard to understand if the subject is the town or the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
Ruled out because the sentence talks about the successor of roman towns, so to put another town on the fort is senseless

B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
Ruled out, the subject is correct but the second part is awkard. As, in this case, should be used to point a reason to something, and, even with this use, the rest of the second part is awkard and repete fort in a useless manner

C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
It does not modify correctly the first part of the sentence

D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
The province?! Senseless! The province is not the successor of the fort

E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
Correct one! The fort of Vindomora is the right subject, and the second part explain why is has remained unfound! This makes sense and is grammatically correct
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 37
CAT Tests
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jan 2019, 20:27
1
generis:

Thank you for such a detailed explanation! Helped me expand my horizon.

But I have small doubt which I hope you can address. In your explanation, you have mentioned that Option A is incorrect as 'unlike' does not show the desired contrast. My question is doesn't 'unlike' refer to the location of Ebchester differing from that of the other towns? If so, then 'unlike' should show the required contrast.

I'm finding it difficult to eliminate A on the grounds of 'unlike'.
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3544
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jan 2019, 22:08
1
Megha1119 wrote:
generis:

Thank you for such a detailed explanation! Helped me expand my horizon.

But I have small doubt which I hope you can address. In your explanation, you have mentioned that Option A is incorrect as 'unlike' does not show the desired contrast. My question is doesn't 'unlike' refer to the location of Ebchester differing from that of the other towns? If so, then 'unlike' should show the required contrast.

I'm finding it difficult to eliminate A on the grounds of 'unlike'.

Megha1119 - after I re-read the section of my answer to which you refer, I can see that I cut corners.
I left too much unspecified. Good catch!
Thank you for saying something. :) +1

Below is a rewrite. The original text that you read is in this post's footnote
Option A gets eliminated by comparing it to options B and E.
More specifically, option A gets eliminated because fort fits better with unlike than the town of Ebchester does.

Rewrite: Town v. fort

We have a split for the noun to which unlike refers.

Option A uses the town.
Options B and E use the fort.

Which of the two words, town or fort, fits better with the modifier "unlike"?

The prompts says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered . . .

• Examine option A

-- the town of Ebchester is:
1) different from other towns (in the way that it was built), BUT
2) ALSO similar to other towns (because the town of Ebchester has been discovered, just as the other towns have been discovered)
The fact that Ebchester is [also] similar to other towns makes "unlike" problematic

What word does "unlike" cue?
Discovered. Whatever this "unlike" adjective refers to, it has not been discovered.
Ebchester has been discovered.

-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered [near burial sites . . .]
-- That word, discovered, is decisive.
-- The town of Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
Similar to does not equal unlike.

The opening phrase essentially says "Unlike something that has been discovered, _________ — but option A contains a discovered town (Ebchester).

By contrast — Options B and E

IF the fort has not been discovered [as is the case in E and maybe B], then the word UNLIKE is better satisfied.
Unlike fits better with the [undiscovered] fort than it does with the [discovered] town.

If the fort is undiscovered, the fort then is different from discovered towns.
Just different.
The fort is not also similar to discovered towns [as the town of Ebchester is].

Unlike [discovered towns], the fort . . . .

By contrast, the town of Ebchester is both different and similar.
Again: Unlike fits better with the [undiscovered] fort than it does with the [discovered] town.

Eliminate the town. Eliminate option A.

If those changes do not help clear up the issue, tag me again. Again, nice work!

I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is different only, not both different and similar.
Eliminate A.

_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.




Choose life.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2018
Posts: 186
Reviews Badge
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Feb 2019, 12:56
1
Hi generis,

What a beautiful explanation and The way you have presented is really nice.

I reached till the correct answer using another way in 3 mins.

Almost all options were looking grammatically correct or you can also say that I was not able to find any major error in all options and was not able to find any connecting error in first few underlined part and sentence before that "the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province...." hence I went to end part to find any sentence connecting error and narrowed down to C and E, than selected E as it was making more meaningful sentence than C.

generis wrote:
generis wrote:

Project SC Butler: Day 46 Sentence Correction (SC1)

[/b]


Unlike the successors of many Roman towns, which are generally discovered a short distance from the towns’ burial sites, the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort.

A) the town of Ebchester in the province of Lower Britain was built directly on top of the fort of Vindomora, thus not leaving much to be seen of
B) the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen, as directly under the town of Ebchester is built
C) that which can be seen of the fort of Vindomora is scarce, as the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of
D) the province of Lower Britain has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora in the town of Ebchester, built directly above
E) the fort of Vindomora in the province of Lower Britain has remained unfound, because the town of Ebchester was built directly on top of

OFFICIAL ANSWER

My annotations are in blue typeface.

• While it is tempting to compare things of the same kind (towns to towns) we must make sure that not only the noun, but also the verb is properly compared.

• In this case, since the town [of Ebchester] has been “’discovered,” and since we are looking for a comparison of contrast (unlike),
it makes sense to compare [the discovered town of Ebchester] to something that has remained unfound—the fort of Vindomora in answers (B) and (E).

• B is grammatically awkward; is built the fort is inverted, and the entire final dependent clause is a stylistic and rhetorical mess.

• The answer is E

COMMENTS

This question is instructive. I had a comparatively hard time with it until I shifted gears.

(1) METHOD: Find the meaning. Grammatical error analysis will not help much.

Trying to find grammatical errors in isolation will not work in this question.
All of the answers except D are arguably correct in a grammatical sense.
as Mahmoudfawzy83 (welcome!) noted
I think it is more about the meaning rather than grammatical mistakes.

(2) METHOD: Compare similar answer to similar answer.
Such comparison often will make the better sentence clear,
and from that clarity we can examine the "better" parts.

(3) STRATEGY: In the same way that I urge people to stay laser-focused on the conclusion in CR,
this question demonstrates that we need to stay laser-focused on the logic of UNLIKE, and that
we need to look for logical clues (discussed below) that can help us choose an answer with contrast.

• Clarification about the phrase "comparison of contrast."
The phrase "a comparison of contrast" just means that we are looking for "contrast."
-- A rather heated debate exists about defining contrast as different from compare.
Many North American students (don't know about Europe) see essay questions in which the
prompt is "compare and contrast" the _____ .

-- the phrasing in this answer is used because the author is in the "contrast is a subset of compare" camp (as am I)
We can compare the similarities.
We can compare the differences. (Hence, unlike.)

This page explains the issue,
some posters point out that both Oxford and Collins dictionaries include "contrast" in the definition of "compare."

• Stats
At the moment, the stats on this question are:
67% chose A
4% chose B
0 chose C
4% chose D
25% chose E

• Approach?

• Find cue words in the non-underlined part.

I focused on two items, unlike and the fort

• Unlike?
Level 1 - the town of Ebchester is different from many other towns.
Other towns ["discovered"] were built near cemetaries.
Ebchester was built on top of a fort.
Okay, that's a difference, but we have two problems.
One, Ebchester is LIKE the other towns because it, too, has been discovered.
Two, why does this question include some buried fort? Is it visible or not?

Level 2 - Find the split: Is the fort visible, or not?

• Split: A, B, C, and D (fort is barely visible) vs. E (fort is not discovered)

-- I think that the OE incorrectly suggests that (E) and (B) show about the same level of contrast, that both correctly depict the fort as different from the discovered town of Ebchester. (See my analysis below.)

I see a different split, not 2-3 (EB-ACD), but rather 1-4 (E-ABCD)

A, B, C, and D all contain information that the fort is hard to see.
E says that the fort has not been discovered.
But I am troubled. I am not convinced that we should be comparing anything to the fort.

• Pick the best of A, B, C, and D
Options C and D are rhetorical disasters.

D) has little remains seen of the fort of Vindomora
-- not grammatical: "little remains" suggests that the remains themselves are small.
-- not grammatical: "seen" is the wrong adjective. "Visible" is what "seen" is supposed to convey,
but seen implies a witness. "Can be seen" would fix that issue.
-- not stylistically defensible
a town "has" (verb) "little remains seen" (object) is almost incomprehensible.
Compare to A and B. Both are better.
A) states: thus not leaving much to be seen of the fort. That phrasing is correct.
B) the fort . . . can hardly be seen. That phrasing is correct.

At the least, A and B are better than D.

C is awful, too. . .. that which can be seen [of the fort] is scarce . . .
-- wrong adjective. Scarce implies "not enough" [to meet some expectation or demand]
-- not always, but usually GMAC prefers the pronoun "what" to the phrase "that which"
-- C is not as good as A or B

Eliminate C and D.

• A, B, and E
-- This part is hard. Stylistically, A and E are better than B.
-- But I still have my logical problem: which answer shows contrast best or stays most consistent with UNLIKE?

• Logic
I shift gears. Back to basics. Check the first word of each of the remaining answers.
-- A) uses "the town." Options B and E use "the fort."
-- the town of Ebchester is different from other towns in the way that it was built,
but it has been discovered.
-- The prompt says, "Unlike X, which are generally discovered
-- That word is decisive. Ebchester is different from AND similar to other towns.
IF the fort is not discovered, then UNLIKE is better satisfied because the fort is different only, not both different and similar.

Eliminate A.

• B or E?
-- B and E both begin with "fort."
-- But (B) mentions that the fort "can hardly be seen."
-- (E) says that the fort is unfound.

Unfound is the opposite of discovered. That contrast is stronger than the contrast words in (B).

Answer E it is

If you do agree with the author of the OE that B and E must be chosen from style, diction, and rhetorical angles,
the OE author is correct that E is better.

Rewrite of B:
. . . . sites, the fort of Vincomora in the province of Lower Britain can hardly be seen
because the town of Ebchester is built directly on top of the fort. [as in C and E]

I am very impressed by the people who posted.
There is no correct answer, although I think that some of the analysis
in each post is important. All of the posters demonstrate
exactly what I had to fight: getting caught up in noun comparison
is a distraction.

Today is the first day of SC Butler that I have not awarded kudos.
But I am happy: four very smart people just showed us
ways of approaching this kind of question that did NOT work.
Knowing what does not work is just as important as knowing what does.

Many thanks to Mahmoudfawzy83 , Darshi04 , Prateekj05 , and Mudit27021988

Holiday season has arrived where I live. Happy Holidays!

_________________
______________________________
Press +1 Kudos if my post helped you a little and help me to ulcock the tests ;) Wish you all success

I'd appreciate learning about the grammatical errors in my posts


Please let me know if I'm wrong somewhere and help me to learn :-)
GMAT Club Bot
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally   [#permalink] 09 Feb 2019, 12:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne