Last visit was: 24 Jul 2024, 14:17 It is currently 24 Jul 2024, 14:17
Toolkit
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

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.

# V11-20

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Alum
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4330
Own Kudos [?]: 51714 [26]
Given Kudos: 2326
Location: United States (WA)
Schools: Ross '20 (M)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GMAT 2: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
GMAT 3: 760 Q50 V42 (Online)
GPA: 3.8
WE:Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
SVP
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2402
Own Kudos [?]: 15326 [5]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
General Discussion
Alum
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4330
Own Kudos [?]: 51714 [1]
Given Kudos: 2326
Location: United States (WA)
Schools: Ross '20 (M)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GMAT 2: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
GMAT 3: 760 Q50 V42 (Online)
GPA: 3.8
WE:Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Posts: 140
Own Kudos [?]: 54 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.65
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
1
Kudos
Can you please elaborate how "Can be potential"is redundant ?
SVP
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2402
Own Kudos [?]: 15326 [2]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
2
Kudos
avdgmat4777 wrote:
Can you please elaborate how "Can be potential"is redundant ?

The sting can be devastating = the sting is potentially devastating. (i.e. The sting has the potential to cause devastation, whether it would cause or not is not known - it can cause, just that much is known)

Thus "can be potentially" is redundant.
Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2014
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Hi,

Can you please elaborate the usage of 'whom' in this sentence?

Also please give details on the usage of whom - Is 'whom' a possessive form for things as well, like 'whose' is?
Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Status:Active
Affiliations: NA
Posts: 188
Own Kudos [?]: 114 [1]
Given Kudos: 59
GMAT 1: 590 Q50 V21
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V37
GPA: 3.5
1
Bookmarks
In the last phrase to whom is correct or for whom ?
Intern
Joined: 27 Nov 2016
Posts: 40
Own Kudos [?]: 105 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Location: India
GPA: 2.71
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Does some one notices Death and lethal ?? It changes the meaning completely.

Like most of the questions GmatClub SC explanations are not clear .
Manager
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Posts: 70
Own Kudos [?]: 26 [0]
Given Kudos: 8
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.49
Death = Lethal

Does not change the meaning at all.
Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2018
Posts: 59
Own Kudos [?]: 60 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: United Arab Emirates
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
IMO E should use "devastating TO...."FOR whom" and not "devastating FOR....TO whom"

Especially because the earlier section has used "TO an adult", so using FOR is not parallel
Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 78
Own Kudos [?]: 66 [0]
Given Kudos: 171
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V28
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V35
GMAT 3: 680 Q47 V36
GPA: 3.84
Hi experts,

What part of a sentence does "to whom it can even be lethal" plays in answer D? Is it a modifier?

it is potentially devastating for infants or elderly humans– the toxins act by binding to sodium channels, inhibiting the inactivation of activated channels and blocking neuronal transmission– to whom it can even be lethal.
Current Student
Joined: 20 Jun 2018
Posts: 226
Own Kudos [?]: 256 [0]
Given Kudos: 121
Hello generis , I am struggling with this type of question.
Option E
While scorpion sting can cause moderate damage to an adult human, it is potentially devastating for infants or elderly humans– the toxins act by binding to sodium channels, inhibiting the inactivation of activated channels and blocking neuronal transmission– to whom it can even be lethal.

Isn't this an example of a run on or something in similar line? I thought we need an absolute modifier after humans-?
I am sure I am missing a lot here.
Intern
Joined: 19 Mar 2020
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Is the expression '' for whom it may even ...'' correct in option A
Intern
Joined: 25 Sep 2019
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [1]
Given Kudos: 20
1
Bookmarks
it isn't.

can use the inverted sentence trick for prep-whom (to whom, for whom, etc)

"infants or elderly [...] for whom it may even cause death" -->
"it may even cause death for infants or elderly" --> doesnt make sense

"infants or elderly [...] to whom it may even cause death" -->
"it may even cause death to infants or elderly" --> makes sense

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 319
Own Kudos [?]: 246 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
souvik101990 MentorTutoring
Is the function of hyphen is same as comma ?
I choose option B, thinking who refers to" human" before hyphen in sentence.
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3507
Own Kudos [?]: 6986 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
2
Kudos
Harsh2111s wrote:
souvik101990 MentorTutoring
Is the function of hyphen is same as comma ?
I choose option B, thinking who refers to" human" before hyphen in sentence.

Hello, Harsh2111s. The dashes in the original sentence, to my eye, appear to be what are called en dashes, perhaps in place of em dashes. Since the latter are more commonly used in tandem in place of double commas, I will base my discussion on em dashes. To be clear, I am talking about the following symbol: —. It appears as a long dash and is sometimes commonly called a hyphen. A pair of em dashes surround information that can be removed from the sentence without disturbing the main clause.

The lottery winner—John Doe—decided to donate a portion of his winnings to charity.

You will notice that the shell of the sentence we are examining is as follows (with the correct answer inserted):

While scorpion sting can cause moderate damage to an adult human, it is potentially devastating for infants or elderly humans, to whom it can even be lethal.

Em dashes can also be used in place of colons to add emphasis to a word, phrase, or clause, so they have plenty of uses, but to keep matters simple, the one we see here is just as a replacement for commas, perhaps because the internal punctuation might make the aside about the toxins less clear within the context of the entire sentence.

As for the answer choices here, if you can spot the redundancy in can/could [be] + potentially, then you can arrive at a 50/50 proposition between (C) and (E), and devastating people does not make sense in the former. Thank you for calling my attention to the question. Happy studies.

- Andrew
Manager
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [0]
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
Schools: IIMC MBAEx'23
sayantanc2k wrote:
akshatrustagi wrote:
Hi,

Can you please elaborate the usage of 'whom' in this sentence?

Also please give details on the usage of whom - Is 'whom' a possessive form for things as well, like 'whose' is?

"Whom" is the object form of the pronoun "who". Please take a look at the following groups:

Person - Who (subject), whose (possessive), whom (object).

Example:
The person, who came here, is my uncle. ( subject who)
The person, whose car is parked outside, is my uncle. (possessive whose)
The person, whom you saw, is my uncle. (object whom)

Thing - Which (subject), whose (possessive), which (object).
The book, which is lying on the table, is mine. (subject which)
The book, whose pages are all torn, is mine. (possesssive whose)
The book, which you are reading, is mine. (object which)

In option E, the object form (whom is used)

It can be lethal to infants or elderly humans. (the infants or elderly humans = object of preposition "to")
Hence the object form "whom" is used.
....to whom it can be lethal.

Dear sayantanc2k,
Thanks for the explanation.
I need clarity for my understanding whether "to whom" or "for whom" makes any difference in the meaning of sentence and grammatical point of view?

GMATNinja generis bb Bunuel VeritasKarishma egmat

Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15148
Own Kudos [?]: 66848 [1]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
1
Kudos
priyanshu14 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
akshatrustagi wrote:
Hi,

Can you please elaborate the usage of 'whom' in this sentence?

Also please give details on the usage of whom - Is 'whom' a possessive form for things as well, like 'whose' is?

"Whom" is the object form of the pronoun "who". Please take a look at the following groups:

Person - Who (subject), whose (possessive), whom (object).

Example:
The person, who came here, is my uncle. ( subject who)
The person, whose car is parked outside, is my uncle. (possessive whose)
The person, whom you saw, is my uncle. (object whom)

Thing - Which (subject), whose (possessive), which (object).
The book, which is lying on the table, is mine. (subject which)
The book, whose pages are all torn, is mine. (possesssive whose)
The book, which you are reading, is mine. (object which)

In option E, the object form (whom is used)

It can be lethal to infants or elderly humans. (the infants or elderly humans = object of preposition "to")
Hence the object form "whom" is used.
....to whom it can be lethal.

Dear sayantanc2k,
Thanks for the explanation.
I need clarity for my understanding whether "to whom" or "for whom" makes any difference in the meaning of sentence and grammatical point of view?

GMATNinja generis bb Bunuel VeritasKarishma egmat

"lethal to" is more common but "lethal for" is also used sometimes. I wouldn't pick based on that.
(A), (B) and (D) have redundancy errors and (C) has a modifier problem: "the toxins bind to sodium channels, which inhibit the inactivation of activated channels and block neuronal transmission"
It looks like "which" is referring to "sodium channels". How can sodium channels inhibit inactivation of activated channels? It is the "binding with toxins" that inhibits inactivation. Option (E) uses the cause-effect present participle "inhibiting". So (E) is correct.
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 34076
Own Kudos [?]: 853 [0]
Given Kudos: 0