A study of children of divorced parents found that ten years

Question

A study of children of divorced parents found that ten years after the parents' divorce, children who had been under six years of age at the time of the settlement were  not preoccupied, nor even very curious, about the reasons that led to their parents' divorce .

(A) not preoccupied, nor even very curious, about the reasons that led to their parents' divorce
(B) not preoccupied with, or even very curious about, the reasons for their parents' divorce
(C) neither preoccupied, nor even very curious, with the reasons that led to their parents divorce
(D) neither preoccupied with the reasons that led to their parents' divorces or even very curious about them
(E) neither preoccupied with the reasons that their parents divorced nor even very curious about it

SC29561.01

https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/10/science/major-study-assesses-the-children-of-divorce-by-sandra-blakeslee.html

Younger children, however, were  not preoccupied, nor even very curious, with the reasons that led to their parents' divorce .

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

To answer your question about B and C, let’s take a look at the whole question.

Frustratingly, in some of these choices the only clear problem is the idiom. We usually don’t encourage people to focus on idiom issues (for more on that, check out our  No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms ). But let’s go through the answer choices and see what we come up with:

The first issue with (A) is idiomatic: we have "not...nor" instead of "neither...nor." But it's best to be conservative when it comes to idioms, so let's chalk this up as a strike against (A) and move on.

Next, we have two descriptors for the children, so let’s see if the sentence works for each one individually:

1) children {...} were not preoccupied ABOUT the reasons {...}  
 2)   {...} were not even very curious ABOUT the reasons {...}

You can be curious ABOUT something, so the second bit works here. But you can only be preoccupied WITH something, not preoccupied ABOUT something. So we have another idiomatic issue and our second strike against (A).

The final issue (which does not involve idioms) is that the second part of the sentence is a bit redundant—we don’t need to say that they were reasons "that  led  to" their divorce because that’s what reasons do... something like “reasons for their divorce” would suffice. That gives us our third strike against (A).

If you aren't sure about the idioms, you'll have a tough time eliminating (A) right away. But with three votes against it, (A) isn't looking good.

While we don’t have the “neither/nor” construction, the “or” functions just fine for joining the clauses.

Let’s now check the idioms:

1) “preoccupied  with …the reasons” and  
 2) “curious  about  the reasons.”

Both work, so let’s keep (B) for now.

Here the neither/nor works.

Let’s now break up the sentence as we did in (A) and (B):

1) “preoccupied WITH the reasons.” - This works.
2) “curious WITH the reasons.” - Nope, we don’t have the right idiom here. The idiom is “curious ABOUT.”

In addition, there seems to be an issue with commas in this option:

The commas after "preoccupied" and after "curious" seem to act as parentheses--they are there to indicate extra, nonessential information. 
 But watch what happens if we get rid of the comma-separated part in (C): "children were neither preoccupied with the reasons that led to their parents divorce." This sentence now doesn't make sense on it's own. 
 In (B), however, if we get rid of the comma-separated part, we have: "...children were not preoccupied with the reasons...", which is totally fine. This is another vote in favor of (B) over (C).

Also (and this might just be a typo), there should be an apostrophe after parents to indicate possession: “parents’ divorce.”

(B) is still the best option, so let's get rid of (C).

We can have “neither/nor” or “not/or,” but we can’t have “neither/or.”

In addition, the plural is off here: “parents’ divorces.” "Divorces" sounds like the parents had multiple divorces. While it might be the case that their parents had multiple divorces, it is unlikely, especially since the statement discusses a single divorce earlier on in the sentence: “ten years after the parents'  divorce .”

(D) is out.

To explain this answer choice, I'll shamelessly steal from  an earlier post :

(B) is our winner!

goalsnr · Answer

I think the SC is testing prepositions + Neither/nor concepts
I got B by POE

A. "with" missing after "preoccupied"
 Also "Not X ,Nor Y " is incorrect Usage

No X , nor Y
 No X or Y
 No X and no Y 
are the correct idioms

c.  neither preoccupied, nor even very curious, with  , is incorrect
neither preoccupied  with  , nor even very curious  about  , the reasons

D. What is "them" referring to? Divorces, reasons?
Logically it must refer to "reasons"

E. Neither X nor Y is the correct usage
Also "it" - incorrect pronoun for reasons.

ArtVandaley · Answer

THe lessons to learn here are 
1) IDioms still matter and gmat prefers some over the other. In this example  preoccupied with  and  curious about   are two idioms that GMAT has given preference over the standard  neither nor  one.

2) In certain OG questions, GMAT has used not X nor Y structure. HEre it uses not X or Y. So meaning trumps structure and Idiom.

Here B is the correct answer as it correctly uses  preoccupied with  and  curious about   split.

gmatt1476 · Answer

Official Explanation

Diction; Parallelism

The correct idioms are preoccupied with and curious about. In the sentence as it is written, because of the placement of the commas immediately after preoccupied and curious, the preposition about is associated not only with curious, which is idiomatically correct, but also with preoccupied, which is not correct.

Furthermore, not . . . nor is idiomatically incorrect. The correct forms are neither . . . nor and not . . . or.

A. As discussed above, this choice is flawed in its use of both preoccupied about and not . . . nor.

B. Correct. This choice is correct. Both preoccupied with and not . . . or are idiomatically correct.

C. This choice uses the incorrect construction curious with, rather than the correct curious about. On the other hand, its uses of neither . . . nor and preoccupied with are correct.

D. This choice uses the incorrect idiomatic form neither . . . or.

E. This choice incorrectly uses the singular pronoun it to refer to the plural reasons. On the other hand, its use of preoccupied with, curious about, and neither . . . nor are all correct.

The correct answer is B.

henilshaht · Answer

GMATNinja : can you please help on this one? I didn't even consider B because it doesn't even contain neither...nor.. structure. What is error in option C?

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

Hi

Let me try to address your query.

In such sentences, where two separate items are being negated, it is not mandatory to have a "neither...nor" structure. A "not X or Y" structure as used in option (B) works perfectly fine to convey the intended meaning. Consider the following example:

John counts neither soccer nor basketball among his favourite sports.
John does not count soccer or basketball among his favourite sports.

Both the above structures are correct.

On the other hand, in option (C), there is the incorrect usage of "curious with". The correct idiomatic usage would be "curious about". Hence option (C) is ruled out.

Hope this helps.

haidunzu617 · Answer

GMATNinja

I have a question with respect to E. Is there anything wrong with the usage of "reasons that their parents divorced"?
I saw someone said that it should be "reasons that their parents divorced for," and since we cannot put "for" at the end of that modifier, it should be changed to "reasons for which their parents divorced."

Is that correct?

GMATIntensive · Answer

Sentence Analysis

https://www.thegmatco.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/16.png

A study concerns the children of divorced parents. This study found that children who had been very young at the time of their parents’s divorce were not very concerned with the reasons for the divorce ten years after the divorce.

There are two errors in the sentence. First, the preposition “about” in “about the reasons” works with “curious” but not with “preoccupied”. The correct preposition with “preoccupied” is “with”. Second, “Nor” can be used with “not” only when a verb follows “nor”. Since an adjective “curious” follows “nor” here, we need to use “or” in place of “nor”. Refer this link for more information about this use.

Option Analysis

A.  not preoccupied, nor even very curious, about the reasons that led to their parents' divorce 
 Incorrect . For the error mentioned above.

B.  not preoccupied with, or even very curious about, the reasons for their parents' divorce 
 Correct .

C.  neither preoccupied, nor even very curious, with the reasons that led to their parents divorce 
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:

1. The preposition “with” doesn’t work with “curious”.
2. The word “parents” needs to have an apostrophe at the end since it modifies “divorce”.

D.  neither preoccupied with the reasons that led to their parents' divorces or even very curious about them 
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:

1. “Neither… or” is idiomatically incorrect.
2. The word “them” could refer to parents, divorces, or reasons. The reference is not clear.

E.  neither preoccupied with the reasons that their parents divorced nor even very curious about it 
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:
1. Singular “it” has been used for the plural “reasons”. 
2. “The reasons that their parents divorced” is not correct. It can be corrected in the following two ways:
 1. The reasons that their parents divorced for
2. The reasons why their parents divorced

GMATNinja · Answer

In general, any time you find yourself wondering whether a certain construction is allowed, you don't want to use it as a decision point. It's very easy to get lost deliberating over rules that don't actually exist.

In this case, "reasons that their parents divorced," isn't the world's most elegant phrase, but I'm not sure that it's WRONG, exactly. There's no concrete grammatical error. The notion isn't illogical. So I'm not getting rid of an answer choice on this basis alone. (Notice that there's no need for a preposition here. And while there are certainly hard-core grammar teachers who will insist that you can't end a sentence with a preposition, there's no consensus on this, so if I encountered this construction, I'd avoid using it as a reason to kill an answer choice.)

So instead, let's search for a more concrete error in (E). Take another look:

"...neither preoccupied with the reasons that their parents divorced nor even very curious about  it "

What does "it" refer to here? The only logical referent is "the reasons," but "it" has to refer to a singular noun, so this is a definitive error. Now I'm perfectly happy giving (E) the boot.

The takeaway: Anytime you're unsure about a rule, accept the possibility that there might be no rule, and look for either concrete grammatical errors or problems with logic and meaning.

I hope that helps!

Manisha_1991 · Answer

GMATNinja   VeritasKarishma  please help in understanding why is option B correct and whats the error in Option C

Pankaj0901 · Answer

Why in Option E can "it" not refer to "divorce", as the other possible noun referent "reasons" is plural? I find no reason to eliminate this option E because of pronoun ambiguity as mentioned by other people. Can someone please explain?

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Hello  Pankaj0901 ,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the intended meaning of the sentence is that the children are not preoccupied with or curious about the  reasons behind  their parents' divorce, not the  divorce itself ;thus, "it" cannot refer to "divorce", as doing so would change the intended meaning.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team.

GMATNinja · Answer

Grammatically, "it" can refer to "divorce." But then we get the following:

It would make sense to say that the children weren't interested in the  reasons  for the divorce and also weren't curious about the  reasons  for the divorce, as we get in (B). But to say that they weren't curious about the divorce itself? The point isn't that the kids think the fact of the divorce is boring, but rather, that they aren't thinking too much about  why  it happened.

Put another way, it's hard to imagine that kids don't care about the divorce itself. But it's reasonable enough to imagine that the kids don't care whether financial disputes or infidelity were the reasons behind the divorce.

So don't get rid of (E) because of pronoun ambiguity. Get rid of it because there's no referent for the pronoun that gives us a meaning as logical as the one we get from (B).

I hope that clears things up!

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Concepts tested here: Pronouns + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The idiomatic construction is "preoccupied with".
• The idiomatic construction is "curious about".
• “neither” cannot be used without “nor”, though "nor" can be used without neither.

A: 
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "preoccupied about"; remember, the idiomatic construction is "preoccupied with". 
2/ Option A uses the needlessly wordy phrase "the reasons that led to their parents' divorce", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

B:   Correct. 
1/ This answer avoids the pronoun error in Option E, as it uses no pronoun to refer to the noun "reasons".
2/ Option B correctly uses the idiomatic constructions "curious about" and "preoccupied with". 
3/ Option B avoids the idiomatic error seen in Option D, as it utilizes "nor" in place of "neither".
4/ Option B is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

C: 
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "curious with"; remember, the idiomatic construction is "curious about". 
2/ Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase " the reasons that led to their parents' divorce", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D: 
1/ This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "neither...nor"; remember, “neither” cannot be used without “nor”, though "nor" can be used without neither. 
2/ Option D uses the needlessly wordy phrase " the reasons that led to their parents' divorce", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

E: 
1/ This answer choice incorrectly refers to the plural noun "reasons" with the singular pronoun "it".
2/ Option E uses the needlessly wordy phrase "the reasons that their parents divorced", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

tayyab2022 · Answer

Dear Experts @GMATNinja @AndrewN @MartyTTP Nor can be used in two ways ... 1. As a FANBOYS (Indpedent Clause Construction) with Not (With Comma) 2. As a neither + nor co-relative clause construction ... Both are used to emphasize TWO negative things. Do you have any idea which one is more appropriate in what scenarios or both are interchangeable ? Need your guidance on this issue.

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  tayyab2022 . You will not have to worry about choosing between the two constructs unless there is some other issue that would separate the two iterations of the sentence. The reason is simple: both are perfectly legitimate ways of expressing a similar idea. In fact, you could toss in a third using  or . All of the following express essentially the same idea.

1)  Neither X nor Y is a factor.

2)  X is not a factor, nor is Y.

3)    X or Y is not a factor.

In the third sentence,  either  could be omitted as an understood element, depending on the context. I know it may be frustrating when you are seeking a definitive answer, but there is no hierarchy to be found here. It just depends on how the author wishes to express the idea, nothing more.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

A study of children of divorced parents found that ten years

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

A study of children of divorced parents found that ten years

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