The Justice Department will likely weigh the substance not o

Question

The Justice Department will likely weigh the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.

1. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
2. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
3. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
4. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but of the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
5. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.

N.B. I posted this question because I could not find it in gmatclub, Please let me know if it was posted before by some one else.

honchos · Answer

Hint for solving:
Idiom tested and parallelism

not only _______________ but also_____________
 
Not only and but also should have parallelism.

This Idiom is quite frequently tested in GMAT so one should master it.

RichaChampion · Answer

I am unable to solve even with your Hint. Can you please guide me how to master this Idiom?

honchos · Answer

Mike from Magoosh has done a great explanation on one question regarding this idiom, try searching it or i will search and post it later on.

Gnpth · Answer

Answer is E. Idioms. Not only X but also Y

honchos · Answer

True and X and Y should be parallel.

igotthis · Answer

I'm going to try taking a shot at this. The Justice Department will likely weigh the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 1. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 2. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 3. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 4. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but of the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 5. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. Clearly, D is out because it does not follow: not only...but also. Now, not only does the sentence have to have this format, but also be parallel

So, we check for the words before and after the not only...but also construction. A, B are out because it sounds like they are weighing the ruling, but what they are actually weighing is the substance in the ruling. Now, between C and E: 3. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. Notice the word -of. To check for parallelism, I normally repeat the sentence that the not only clause has: eg. The Department will likely weigh, not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the substance of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. 5. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the substance of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. The not only phrase already gives me the 'of' so I don't need to repeat it as C does. So, E is the correct answer. I'm no expert, but this is just my 2 cents

honchos · Answer

Here is another question on this Idiom discussed By Mike- bengal-born-writer-philosopher-and-educator-rabindranath-134342.html This will certainly help you to understand Idiom and its application..

RichaChampion · Answer

Thanks I will go through this post, do you have a Idiom list.

Great Forum Indeed.

daagh · Answer

1. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. ---  There is a skewed parallelism of writing here. The meaning is muddled actually. The clear expression would be --- weigh not only the substance of ……..but also the precedent –so wrong  
 
2. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. ---- not only of---- but also the precedent; wrong //ism

3. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch. ------not only the substance ----  but also of – faulty //ism 
 
4. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but of the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.--------  not only but of

5. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.------------- Correct choice with clear expression of intended meaning

mohnish104 · Answer

Just out of curiosity, is A idiomatically correct?

maaadhu · Answer

How come E is parallel?

Not only (the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling), but also (the precedent the ruling would set)

the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling is a Noun or a gerund
the precedent the ruling would set is an independent statement with verb "would"

How can Noun & independent statements be parallel?

Am I missing something?

Experts please clarify my question.

avohden · Answer

Here is the   official explanation   from Veritas.

Answer E   - When using the “not only... but also” structure, you must have strict parallelism following each part of the structure. Only (A) and (E) accomplish this: (B) states “not only of...but also the precedent”, (C) states “not only the substance…but also of” and (D) states “not only the substance…but also of” (A) has the parallel “not only of…but also of” and (E) has “not only the substance….but also the precedent” . (A) is incorrect, though, because of meaning: “the substance” cannot come before not only because “the substance of the precedent” later in the meaning that the justice department will weigh not only the substance but also the precedent. Answer is (E).

nechets · Answer

The best list you will ever find, IMO, is in MGMAT SC guide. Go get the book and you also gain access to 5 of their Mock tests. :lol:

Paris75 · Answer

Hi,

can somone explain the difference between A and E please?

Quite stuck here, I think I do not understand the meaning...

Thanks!

thangvietname · Answer

because sc test meaning, if the intended meaning is hard to understand, or in a specialized field, we fail.

very hard one

mvictor · Answer

Am I the only one concerned with the conditional in answer choice E?
would + if present simple - something not good here...
I disregarded option E just because of this minor "error"...

100mitra · Answer

The only statement with correct idiom is option E.

The Justice Department will likely weigh

not only the substance   of the judge’s upcoming ruling

,but also the precedent   the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.

Posted from my mobile device

Crytiocanalyst · Answer

1. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
not only isn't parallel with but also therefore out

2. the substance not only of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
Similar reasoning as A

3. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also of the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
also of isn't required therefore out

4. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but of the precedent the ruling will set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
also is required after but therefore out

5. not only the substance of the judge’s upcoming ruling, but also the precedent the ruling would set if it countermands a direct order from the executive branch.
THe idimatic usage is correct along with the parallelism therefore our answer

Therefore IMO E

MayankDimri · Answer

I also have same doubt! If present tense...using would in then clause.

The Justice Department will likely weigh the substance not o

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The Justice Department will likely weigh the substance not o

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards