Unseasonable weather in the months before a wine harvest can cool vine

Unseasonable weather in the months before a wine harvest can cool vineyards in the Bordeaux region enough to affect the overall size of the grapes themselves, create unwanted moisture that can cause mold in some grape varieties and deterioration in others.

there is an issue of parallelism in D and E...it should be "to affect and create" this D and E are out
One need "and" before create so A and C are out

(A) to affect the overall size of the grapes themselves, create---AND is missing before "create"

(B) to affect the overall size of the grapes themselves, and create--right option

(C) that the overall size of the grapes themselves are affected, create----three mistakes....1)"that" after "enough" is wrong 2) changing the overall meaning as unseasonable weather can cool vineyards TO affect and Create 3) "and" before create

(D) that it affects the overall size of the grapes themselves, creates---Creates is wrong and one need to put AND before "Create" as unseasonable weather has two impacts, affect the size and create unwanted moisture--->"that" is also wrong

(E) that the size of the grapes are affected and creates---same mistakes as D

sananoor

Just an add-on - the simplified nesting structure is as follows:

Weather cools Vineyards enough to affect size and (to) create moisture. [ W cools V enough to do 2 things... thing 1: affect size and thing 2:create moisture]

The moisture can cause mold and deterioration. [The moisture can cause 2 things .. thing 2.1: mold and 2.2: deterioration]

The things 2.1 and 2.2 are nested within the thing 2.

The above way of thinking may be helpful in solving parallelism problems with high complexity.

Hence the combined structure would be:

Weather cools Vineyards enough to affect size and (to) create moisture that can cause mold and deterioration.

I have a question here. I feel that the usage of list is wrong here. I suppose a,b,and c is a right usage while a,and b is wrong.
Please acknowledge

Hi,
you are correct in your observation..
But it is not that you can never have 'comma' before 'and'.
whenever you are joining two independent clauses with 'and' , you will use 'comma'..
example:-
1) He is very bold and stubborn..
2) He is very bold, and he is stubborn.

in this Q you are correct, COMMA should not be used for teh reason mentioned above, both 'affect and 'create' refer to same subject..

Dear carcass,
My intelligent colleague, thank you for posting this question. I'm happy to respond!

I will say, I am not particularly impressed with the quality of this as a SC question. This is not very challenging and not very GMAT-like.

The prompt is wrong because it lacks the word "and" linking the two branches of the parallelism.

Choice (B) adds the word "and." Presumably, this is the OA.

The other choices introduce a clunky "that"-clause construction. The pronoun subject in (D) is ambiguous. Both (C) & (D) repeat the prompt mistake, and (E) alters the first verb so much that logically the two branches of parallelism don't match.

Basically, the entire question hinges on the presence or absence of "and" between two branches of parallelism: I would call this a "Parallelism 101" topic. This is leagues below the kind of thinking the GMAT SC requires. If anything, this question might pass as a sub-500 question on the test. As a question writer myself, I would give this question a grade of a C-, minimally acceptable at best.

Here's a high quality SC practice question:
After the 2010 census

Let me know if anyone has any questions.

Mike

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.