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

It is currently 17 Jan 2019, 15:23

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
Events & Promotions in January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
  • The winning strategy for a high GRE score

     January 17, 2019

     January 17, 2019

     08:00 AM PST

     09:00 AM PST

    Learn the winning strategy for a high GRE score — what do people who reach a high score do differently? We're going to share insights, tips and strategies from data we've collected from over 50,000 students who used examPAL.
  • Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

     January 19, 2019

     January 19, 2019

     07:00 AM PST

     09:00 AM PST

    Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

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

 
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 2339
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 09:25
1
1
11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

31% (01:28) correct 69% (01:23) wrong based on 250 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.

_________________

Never look down on anybody unless you're helping them up.
--Jesse Jackson

Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Status: Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2018
Posts: 102
Location: Malaysia
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, 11:17
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
Image

Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 28 Nov 2017
Posts: 133
Location: India
CAT Tests
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 14:22
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: 62
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, 15:44
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: 82
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2018, 22:17
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: 62
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, 10:00
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.

Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 2339
Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 13:43
3
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."

• 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!
_________________

Never look down on anybody unless you're helping them up.
--Jesse Jackson

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 08 Oct 2018
Posts: 62
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, 14:27
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
G
Joined: 28 Nov 2017
Posts: 133
Location: India
CAT Tests
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 15:14
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: 82
Re: Unlike the successor of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 19:49
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: 7
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2018, 21:37
@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: 2168
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, 20:03
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
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

GMAT Club Bot
Re: Unlike the successors of many Roman towns which are generally &nbs [#permalink] 02 Jan 2019, 20:03
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  


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.