Horses are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evo

Question

Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.

A. are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of

B. physically lack the ability to vomit, thus suggesting that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors were more endangered by starving than

C. cannot physically vomit, an observation suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors faced a threat of starving more than

D. are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by

E. are physically unable to vomit, a suggestion that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors faced more danger from starvation than from

__
Brand-new SC problem for all the lovely people of GMAT Club.
Looks like there's this new "deferred answer" feature... I'm going to try this out, with a 24 hour delay. (:
__

RonPurewal · Accepted Answer

Also — Be careful!

Starving  and  poisoning  are  NOT  properly parallel!

Yes, they both end with  __ing  — but that's just a superficial similarity.
•  Starving  would have the horses' ancestors as its  SUBJECT / AGENT .
•  Poisoning , on the other hand, would have the horses' ancestors as its  OBJECT .
Two totally different functionalities.
Non-parallel.

__

If you wanted to make a parallel structure using   starving  , you'd have to use   being poisoned  .
Both of these would have the horses' ancestors as  subject / agent . (The horses' ancestors may have  starved . The horses' ancestors may have  been poisoned .)

Poisoning  is invariant here (it's not in the underline), so this isn't an option — but it's still worth considering, just to clarify your complete understanding of what parallelism actually is and isn't.

niks18 · Answer

A.  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting  that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of---- "incapable of physically vomiting" seems to suggest something, which is illogical

B.  physically lack the ability to vomit, thus suggesting that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors were more endangered by starving than  ------ no verb for the subject horses

C.  cannot physically vomit, an observation suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors faced a threat of starving more than ------ Correct."cannot physically vomit" is a phenomena that is associated with horses. this observation will then lead to suggestion (by experts). "starving more than poisoning" is correct comparison

D. are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were  threatened more by starvation than by ----- this is a passive construction which implies that "starvation and poisoning" threatened ancestors which is illogical.

E.  are physically unable to vomit, a suggestion that  the horse’s evolutionary ancestors faced more danger from starvation than from------ "physically unable to vomit" cannot suggest. its a phenomena associated with horses.

anuj11 · Answer

C !! Though "incapable of physically vomiting" does not seem wrong to me, He was incapable of doing XYZ. This const is correct right ??

I knocked out A as C conveys the meaning better. An observation that suggests ......

rekhabishop · Answer

Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.

A. are  incapable of physically vomiting , suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  -"physically vomit" is illogical

B. physically lack the ability to vomit, thus suggesting that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors  were more endangered by starving  than -  "endangered by starving than by.." is proper parallelism.

C.  cannot physically vomit , an observation suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors faced a  threat of starving more than   -1."physically vomit" is illogical. 2."threat of starving more that of poisoning" is properly parallel

D. are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by

E. are physically unable to vomit, a suggestion that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors faced more danger from starvation than from  -Not perfect, but better than the other available choices.

mikemcgarry  please review and let me know, if I've misinterpreted any option. :)

Paulli1982 · Answer

IMO: D

Incapability of vomiting is an observation, not a suggestion, hence, eliminate A, B, and E.

Between C and D, D sounds better to me although I can't pinpoint exactly where it went wrong with C.

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

jedit · Answer

I think it is D.

A.  physically incapable of vomiting  seems to be better usage. In greater danger of starving also seems odd.

B. endangered by: wrong idiomatic usage IMO.

C. Comparison error: compares threat of starving to poisoning.

D. Correct: are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by

E. It is not a suggestion.

RonPurewal · Answer

^^ Not true. Consider: https://gmatclub.com/forum/at-one-time- ... 52712.html There's no perfectly consistent rule for when this instance of "that" can/should be omitted. In general, though, it's worth noting that the SC writers — like other good writers! — make certain adjustments to avoid using the same 'little word' twice in close proximity . • At the link above, for instance — If "it was said THAT..." were used, then you'd have this: ...was so prevalent THAT it was said THAT ... The omission of the second "that" avoids this weirdness. Same thing in the problem currently at hand. ...and, again, same thing here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/australian-e ... 68616.html That problem ^^ uses the less common phrasing "evidence to suggest ..." — rather than the more straightforward "evidence that suggests ..." — because the latter would again create a sentence saying "evidence THAT suggests THAT bla bla bla". __ The only thing you actually HAVE to know about this stuff , by the way, is that the use of THAT after what you're calling "reporting verbs" is OPTIONAL.

daagh · Answer

Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.

A. are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of-- Correct because of prepositional parallelism'of' .

B. physically lack the ability to vomit, thus suggesting that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors were more endangered by starving than --- 'by' is missing -unparallel 
C. cannot physically vomit, an observation suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors faced a threat of starving more than ---- should have been ' more than of ' --unparallel

D. are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by -- suggests that the ancestors were under a possible threat and not that they have already been threatened.

E. are physically unable to vomit, a suggestion that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors faced more danger from starvation than from -----' danger more from starvation than from' would be parallel.

jedit · Answer

Just to clarify my concepts, you see no other grammatical error other than the meaning conveyed by D? I will write both A and D together for clearer understanding.

A- Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.

D- Horses  are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by  poisoning.

- May I ask, what the word 'suggesting' modifies in  A .

- Do you think the phrase  incapable of physically vomiting  is correct; I cannot assume there is any other way of vomiting which makes the word  physically , redundant. Saying  physically incapable of vomiting  does give a more logical meaning that they cannot vomit.

- Lastly, I recently read you cannot always consider the meaning portrayed in the original sentence as the absolute value. If you find another option that is grammatically more correct, you can choose that one. It is high time to ask if this idea is wrong?

daagh · Answer

jedit
Is it that A's meaning is not appropriate and so we must go in for D? What is the meaning problem in A and how is the problem solved in D?

RonPurewal · Answer

^^ This usage of "comma + __ing" is thoroughly nonsense, in fact.

Comma + __ing modifies the preceding action, AND ascribes  primary responsibility/'ownership' of __ING  to the preceding  subject/agent .

e.g.,
   Josiah   was slapped across the face by a girl  , infuriating   his father.  —> Dad is mad at Josiah for letting a girl slap him.
   A girl   slapped Josiah across the face  , infuriating   his father.  —> Dad is mad at the girl who slapped his son.

Choice A thus ascribes the action of 'suggesting'  to horses themselves . This is nonsense.

__

^^ Bravo!
FANTASTIC observation — and PERFECTLY correct.

Physically vomiting  is indeed redundant.
In choice A,  physically  belongs in front of  incapable , not in front of  vomiting .

RonPurewal · Answer

^^ This wording is a bit too convoluted for me, so, I can't just say 'yes' or 'no' here. But, the crux of the matter is this:

There is   ABSOLUTELY NOTHING 'SPECIAL' AT ALL   about   choice A  !  
Choice A is  chosen COMPLETELY AT RANDOM .

The CORRECT meaning is determined by CONTEXT + COMMON SENSE.  
There is no such thing as 'the original meaning'. Choices whose meaning  DIFFERS from the intended meaning / common-sense interpretation  are  WRONG .

__

You might find it helpful to  imagine that the original underline is simply BLANK , with 5 different choices underneath.

As for   WHY   this 'blank' is filled with a   random   choice — that's actually done   to HELP YOU UNDERSTAND the INTENDED MEANING!

If this doesn't make sense, then try transcribing a few SC problems — and then  erasing  the underlined words (leaving a BLANK 'underline').
Most likely, you'll have extreme difficulty understanding what these  partial  sentences are actually SUPPOSED TO SAY!
By inserting an answer choice —  even if that choice is WRONG , as in 80% of cases — GMAC is giving a BIG boost to your ability to interpret the words correctly and sensibly.

akshayk · Answer

Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.
 
Physically incapable of vomiting is better than incapable of physically vomiting. Plus, the verb-ing modifier here makes little sense. OUT!

Starving and Poising are not parallel. Plus for me, there is a similar issue as A with the Verb-ing modifier. OUT!

Starving and Poising are not parallel. OUT!

This seems like the best of the options. KEEP!

I find the meaning to be OFF here. 'Horses are physically unable to vomit' <- This is not a suggestion, in my opinion. It can be an observation, or a stated fact. OUT!

I'm going to stick my head out and say,  D is the answer!

chetan2u · Answer

Hi..

what the Q is testing on..
 1)  Meaning  - the meaning in ORIGINAL is not logical due to the usage of physically vomiting..
2)  Modifier  - could be  a NOUN modifier " an observation" or "a suggestion"  OR  a participle too "suggesting" 
3)  Parallelism  - more X than Y.. so it has to be  more of .. than of...  OR  more by ... than by .....  BUT cannot be more by ... than ....

ONLY D follows the above rules

gmatexam439 · Answer

Hello  RonPurewal , Can you tell that what are the chances of such a question appearing on the GMAT? Option A, B and C are obviously out, but both option D and E also aren't perfect.

Horses  are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of  poisoning.

A. are incapable of  physically vomiting , suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors were in greater danger of starving than of
 It should be physically incapable of vomiting.

B. physically lack the ability to vomit, thus suggesting that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors were more endangered  by starving than 
 Parallelism error

C. cannot physically vomit, an observation suggesting that their evolutionary ancestors faced a threat  of starving more than 
 Parallelism error

D. are physically incapable of vomiting, an observation that suggests their evolutionary ancestors were threatened more by starvation than by
Correct. Though I would have prefered "that" after suggests.

E. are physically unable  to vomit , a suggestion that the horse’s evolutionary ancestors faced more danger from starvation than from
 We can't use to+verb here, since there is no "purpose" in the sentence. Plus the opening independent clause is not a suggestion, its an observation.

Urvashi26 · Answer

ISN'T "DANGER FROM" THE INCORRECT IDIOM USAGE?

Doer01 · Answer

Hi  RonPurewal ,
 Even though I got the answer right, I still cannot figure out “Starving” acting as an object and “Poisoning” as a subject. Could you please explain?

Thanks.

AdityaHongunti · Answer

chetan2u  
Can't ellipsis come into play here?

Can't we take "of" common in C ?

I have a threat more of X than of Y...correct because "of" is following "more" and hence is inside the parallelism and is required to be repeated in Y

I'm facing a greater threat of X than (of) Y.

Please if you could elaborate and explain this to me in detail
  daagh

Posted from my mobile device

ayushgmatclub1 · Answer

Don't we compulsorily need a THAT after suggests in option D?  VeritasKarishma   GMATNinja  please help.

Horses are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evo

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

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

Horses are incapable of physically vomiting, suggesting that their evo

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