GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 17 Feb 2019, 12:06

### 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

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in February
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
272829303112
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272812
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Algebra Webinar

February 17, 2019

February 17, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this Free Algebra Webinar and learn how to master Inequalities and Absolute Value problems on GMAT.
• ### Valentine's day SALE is on! 25% off.

February 18, 2019

February 18, 2019

10:00 PM PST

11:00 PM PST

We don’t care what your relationship status this year - we love you just the way you are. AND we want you to crush the GMAT!

# When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Status: 1,750 Q's attempted and counting
Affiliations: University of Florida
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Location: United States (FL)
Schools: UFL (A)
GMAT 1: 600 Q45 V29
GMAT 2: 590 Q35 V35
GMAT 3: 570 Q42 V28
GMAT 4: 610 Q44 V30
GPA: 3.45
WE: Accounting (Accounting)
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2013, 14:40
5
31
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

44% (01:36) correct 56% (01:48) wrong based on 845 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2013, 11:50
21
12
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

I'm happy to help.

The first split is very clear ---- the pronoun "which" is trying to refer, not to a single noun, but to an entire action. Pronouns can't do that. Only a participial phrase can modify the whole action of a clause. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/modifiers- ... orrection/
especially the final section, "modifying a clause". That's clear. Choices (A) & (C) are non-negotiably wrong.

The word "both" before the verb "broke" is an important clue. This means we don't want a "broke with P and with Q" structure, but rather two verbs in parallel and similar in meaning. That leave (B) out --- (B) cannot possibly be correct.

The correct idiom is "both ... and", and the structure "both ... and also" is always wrong on the GMAT. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... junctions/
Choice (E) makes this idiom mistake, so the only viable answer is (D).

A very good question. Does all this make sense?

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

##### General Discussion
Manager
Status: Student
Joined: 26 Aug 2013
Posts: 182
Location: France
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: EMLYON FT'16
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V32
GPA: 3.44
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2013, 12:52
1
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

oe to follow

Hi all,

Two idioms involved here: both X and Y (with X and Y need to be parallel) & Which (not correct in our case because it refers to the wrong word)

Therefore, eliminate A, B, C and E

_________________

Think outside the box

Intern
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 7
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2013, 06:15
1
Can we not choose D over B because of "Differing", as resulting and differing would be parallel to each other
Intern
Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 3
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2013, 08:04
Hi,

Why is C wrong, i didn't understand
Manager
Status: Student
Joined: 26 Aug 2013
Posts: 182
Location: France
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: EMLYON FT'16
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V32
GPA: 3.44
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2013, 09:26
1
RahulAA wrote:
Hi,

Why is C wrong, i didn't understand

WHICH is a MAJOR red flag!

Which refers to the word just next to it: "The flag, which was green, was destroyed" ==> Here which refers logically to the flag

In our case, which refers to Church

which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed ==> becomes ==> church resulted in the Religious... Here, it makes no sense...

Which needs to be linked with the fact that they "broke" (which means to the action). And here it is not.

Hope it helps!
_________________

Think outside the box

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2013, 10:26
5
2
RahulAA wrote:
Hi mike,

not as a rule but more often that not if which comes after a comma will it be wrong on the gmat?

Unless of course it refers to something in particular

Dear RahulAA,
My friend, there are three different levels to sort out here.
1) Punctuation: On the GMAT, the word "which" will never be correct unless it follows a comma. The word "which" without a comma is always wrong. That's a strict rule.
2) Non-Restrictive Clauses: the reason for the first rule is that, on the GMAT, "that" is always used for restrictive clauses (aka vital noun modifier), and 'which" is always used for non-restrictive clauses (aka non-vital modifiers). See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/that-vs-which-on-the-gmat/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... modifiers/
This means that "which" could be logically incorrect even when the punctuation is right. For example,
I bought a book, which tells about Newton's legacy.
That sentence is grammatically correct and logically incorrect. You see, we have no way of knowing the identify of "the book", except by means of that modifying phrase. Since the modifier is essential for the identity of the noun, we have to use a vital noun modifiers:
I bought a book that tells about Newton's legacy.
3) Limits of a pronoun: Both "that" and "which" are pronouns in this context, and the antecedent of any pronoun must be a noun. They cannot modify a verb or the entire action of a clause:
The profits of XYZ Corporation decreased by 70% in the third quarter, which caused its stock to drop.
To fix that problem, we would either have to
(a) insert a noun as the target for the pronoun
The profits of XYZ Corporation decreased by 70% in the third quarter, a loss that caused its stock to drop.
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-sente ... te-a-word/
or
(b) use a participial phrase --- participles are extraordinarily versatile modifiers, and can modify a noun, a verb, or an entire phrase:
The profits of XYZ Corporation decreased by 70% in the third quarter, causing its stock to drop.
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/participle ... -the-gmat/

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Manager
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 98
Location: United States
Schools: IIMA PGPX"20
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2016, 18:40
mikemcgarry wrote:
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

I'm happy to help.

The first split is very clear ---- the pronoun "which" is trying to refer, not to a single noun, but to an entire action. Pronouns can't do that. Only a participial phrase can modify the whole action of a clause. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/modifiers- ... orrection/
especially the final section, "modifying a clause". That's clear. Choices (A) & (C) are non-negotiably wrong.

The word "both" before the verb "broke" is an important clue. This means we don't want a "broke with P and with Q" structure, but rather two verbs in parallel and similar in meaning. That leave (B) out --- (B) cannot possibly be correct.

The correct idiom is "both ... and", and the structure "both ... and also" is always wrong on the GMAT. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... junctions/
Choice (E) makes this idiom mistake, so the only viable answer is (D).

A very good question. Does all this make sense?

Mike

Hi Mike
I believe in In Option D "Differing" is modifying the action of the previous clause whose subject is They "Calvinists ".
If my understanding is correct then this modifier does not make much sense to me.
Can you please shed some more light on this.
_________________

Feel Free to Press Kudos if you like the way I think .

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 7334
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2016, 18:54
2
282552 wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

I'm happy to help.

The first split is very clear ---- the pronoun "which" is trying to refer, not to a single noun, but to an entire action. Pronouns can't do that. Only a participial phrase can modify the whole action of a clause. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/modifiers- ... orrection/
especially the final section, "modifying a clause". That's clear. Choices (A) & (C) are non-negotiably wrong.

The word "both" before the verb "broke" is an important clue. This means we don't want a "broke with P and with Q" structure, but rather two verbs in parallel and similar in meaning. That leave (B) out --- (B) cannot possibly be correct.

The correct idiom is "both ... and", and the structure "both ... and also" is always wrong on the GMAT. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... junctions/
Choice (E) makes this idiom mistake, so the only viable answer is (D).

A very good question. Does all this make sense?

Mike

Hi Mike
I believe in In Option D "Differing" is modifying the action of the previous clause whose subject is They "Calvinists ".
If my understanding is correct then this modifier does not make much sense to me.
Can you please shed some more light on this.

hi,
the Q talks of two actions when the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine..
1) they broke with the Roman Catholic Church..
the verb+ing modifier " RESULTING" modifies/talks of the action or result of THIS preceding clause.....
SO breaking with the Roman Catholic Church resulted in in the Religious Wars of the 16th century...

2.they abandoned the Lutherans
the verb +ing modifier "DIFFERING" now modifies THIS clause...
SO the action of abandoning the Lutherans was in contrast with the thought process of fellow Protestants

_________________

1) Absolute modulus : http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
2)Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html
3) effects of arithmetic operations : https://gmatclub.com/forum/effects-of-arithmetic-operations-on-fractions-269413.html
4) Base while finding % increase and % decrease : https://gmatclub.com/forum/percentage-increase-decrease-what-should-be-the-denominator-287528.html

GMAT Expert

Manager
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 98
Location: United States
Schools: IIMA PGPX"20
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2016, 19:16
2
Thanks Chetan
I missed it for some reason.
Anyways congrats for reaching 1000 Kudos (1000th was from me )
_________________

Feel Free to Press Kudos if you like the way I think .

Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2587
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2016, 20:05
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

oe to follow

pretty straight forward one.
A and C can be eliminated right away, as the relative pronoun illogically refers to the preceded noun.
we need an ing modifier.
B - and the lutherans - looks like a noun without a verb. out.
D. looks good. broke with the church and abandoned the lutherans. 2 verbs for the same subject. ing modifiers correctly used.
E. and also redundant.
Manager
Joined: 07 May 2015
Posts: 82
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Feb 2016, 16:18
Hi mikemcgarry

Can you please help me understand the usage of both in this sentence. Is it not odd to say

"I both finished home work and played outside" as compared to "I did both finished homework and played outside". The non-underlined part uses the first one in the list.

mikemcgarry wrote:
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

I'm happy to help.

The first split is very clear ---- the pronoun "which" is trying to refer, not to a single noun, but to an entire action. Pronouns can't do that. Only a participial phrase can modify the whole action of a clause. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/modifiers- ... orrection/
especially the final section, "modifying a clause". That's clear. Choices (A) & (C) are non-negotiably wrong.

The word "both" before the verb "broke" is an important clue. This means we don't want a "broke with P and with Q" structure, but rather two verbs in parallel and similar in meaning. That leave (B) out --- (B) cannot possibly be correct.

The correct idiom is "both ... and", and the structure "both ... and also" is always wrong on the GMAT. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... junctions/
Choice (E) makes this idiom mistake, so the only viable answer is (D).

A very good question. Does all this make sense?

Mike
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2016, 10:54
neeraj609 wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry

Can you please help me understand the usage of both in this sentence. Is it not odd to say

"I both finished home work and played outside" as compared to "I did both finished homework and played outside". The non-underlined part uses the first one in the list.

Dear neeraj609,
I'm happy to respond.

First of all, my friend, I am going to make a suggestion. When you are discussing individual words and their usage, please put the word in quote marks to distinguish it. You wrote:
At first, I thought you were trying to say:
Then I realized, you were trying to say:
Do you see the confusion caused by what you wrote? Part of studying for the GMAT effectively is learning how to communicate with precision. Imprecise communication in the business world costs millions of dollars in losses!

What you are asking is tricky is because it's not a point of grammar. It's a point of rhetoric. Remember that the GMAT SC is NOT simply a test of grammar. It is a test of grammar, logic, and rhetoric all together, and to pay attention to grammar and ignore the other two is disastrous.

"I finished home work and played outside."
Of course, this is not a particularly GMAT-like sentence. In this sentence as written, there are no surprises. In fact, the action it describes is entirely cliche. When a young person finishes her homework, we expect that young person to play outside. That is 100% predictable.

In the structure [subject]"both"[verb #1]"and"[verb #2], the word "both" is used for rhetorical emphasis, to highlight an unexpected combination of actions. If the two actions are expected with each other, as in your example sentence, the word "both" is 100% out of place. Consider this sentence:
My friend both dances ballet and practices karate.
In that sentence, the word "both" is entirely justified, because this combination of actions jars our expectations. Ballet is graceful and delicate, and we expect an artistic sensitive person to do that. Karate is a powerful martial art form, and we expect someone tough to practice that. The idea of someone who does both is entirely unexpected, and the word "both" highlights the fact that the combination is beyond our expectations.

This is precisely what is happening in this SC question. Historically, most groups that broke with the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation banded together in alliance, so the fact that the Calvinist broke with the Catholics and also didn't align with the Lutherans jars our expectations. We wouldn't expect one group to take both of those actions. The word "both" serves rhetorically to highlight this broken expectation.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Joined: 06 Apr 2012
Posts: 22
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2016, 16:58
Hi both Chetan2u and Mike, the experts. Thanks in advance.
I get all the wonderful explanations you guys made, but in this case what I don't get is the meaningof the sentence. In the second part of the sentence, the modifier "differing. ...is explaining how they did it, and doesn't seem probable that they abandoned the Lutherans by differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

Can anyone explain the changes of meanings in the answer choices A, D & E?

Thanks.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4486
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Feb 2016, 10:16
1
anonimo wrote:
Hi both Chetan2u and Mike, the experts. Thanks in advance.
I get all the wonderful explanations you guys made, but in this case what I don't get is the meaning of the sentence. In the second part of the sentence, the modifier "differing. ...is explaining how they did it, and doesn't seem probable that they abandoned the Lutherans by differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

Can anyone explain the changes of meanings in the answer choices A, D & E?

Thanks.

Dear anonimo,
I'm happy to respond. First of all, here's the OA version, with (D):

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

My friend, I don't know how much you know about the religious strife in Europe in the 16th century. You don't have to be an expert to approach GMAT SC, but the more you have a general sense of the flow of history, the easier it will be to understand these things in context.

Part of what was happening during this time is that everyone was at war with everyone else. It's not like today's world, in which people can say: "OK, you and I disagree about some political or religious ideal, but we still can live peacefully in the same society." Tolerance and diversity and cultural relativity are very new ideas in the history of humanity, and these most certainly were not widely appreciated in the 16th century. In those days, groups that were in religious/spiritual disagreement were almost automatically in political disagreement and therefore potentially at war with each other. The Roman Catholic Church of those days was as war with just about anyone who disagreed with it, so they were fighting both the Lutherans and the Calvinist. Now, the Calvinist could have done themselves a big favor, and the Lutherans as well, if they decided to cooperate with the Lutherans and form an alliance against the Roman Catholics. According to the sentence, they did not do that. The "abandoned" the Lutherans: this was not just philosophical/theological disagreeing about the Communion; instead, this theological disagreement precipitated a political disagreement, which put the Lutherans and Calvinists essentially at war with one another. It was a crazy time, a time hard to appreciate with our modern values. Today, simply differing in opinions about theological/religious questions would not be enough to cause war, at least among people studying for the GMAT! Of course, there are places of tremendous religious intolerance even in 2016: it might be helpful to realize that much of Europe in the 1500s was similar to these places of intolerance today.

Versions (A) & (E) don't change the meaning. They are just poorly written.

(A) makes a big pronoun mistake, using "which" to refer to an action. That's a classic GMAT grammar mistake. This has nothing to do with meaning. (C) also makes that mistake.

(E) is almost identical to (D), but it tosses in the un-idiomatic word "also." It's idiomatic not to use "also" with "both."
both X and Y = correct idiom
X and also Y = correct idiom
both X and also Y = incorrect idiomatically
Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with a change in meaning. This is purely an idiom mistake.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 7334
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Feb 2016, 20:06
1
anonimo wrote:
Hi both Chetan2u and Mike, the experts. Thanks in advance.
I get all the wonderful explanations you guys made, but in this case what I don't get is the meaningof the sentence. In the second part of the sentence, the modifier "differing. ...is explaining how they did it, and doesn't seem probable that they abandoned the Lutherans by differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

Can anyone explain the changes of meanings in the answer choices A, D & E?

Thanks.

Hi anonimo,
the efforts of Mike in giving even the history perspective is commendable..

Ill give you the answer from perspective of someone, who is not aware of the background to conflict..

The Q is..
Quote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

You have asked about the choices A, D and E, so i'll restrict to these three choices..

1) whenever you have idioms such as not only X but Y, or both .X. and .Y..,
write both parts separately see if it makes sense..

lets see A..

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and they with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

a) you can see "they with the L" is missing the VERB...
had they said-- they broke both with X and with y-- would be correct
b) usage of "which" tells us that " the Roman Catholic Church" resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century-- this is non-sensical meaning..

lets see the D choice

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

As I said we will go with the meaning as given to us, since we are not aware about the event..
I take the meaning " the action of abandoning Lutherans is in CONTRAST to what the fellow Ps believe the DOCTRINES stand for..

lets see the E choice

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.
this choice has two faults..
a) meaning issue:- this wrongly suggests that the Lutherans differed from their..., it was not Ls who differed but the action of abandoning Ls that differed from what fellow ...
b) also:- both and also convey the same meaning--- Redundancy

Hope it helps

_________________

1) Absolute modulus : http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
2)Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html
3) effects of arithmetic operations : https://gmatclub.com/forum/effects-of-arithmetic-operations-on-fractions-269413.html
4) Base while finding % increase and % decrease : https://gmatclub.com/forum/percentage-increase-decrease-what-should-be-the-denominator-287528.html

GMAT Expert

Intern
Joined: 06 Apr 2012
Posts: 22
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Feb 2016, 17:46
chetan2u wrote:
anonimo wrote:
Hi both Chetan2u and Mike, the experts. Thanks in advance.
I get all the wonderful explanations you guys made, but in this case what I don't get is the meaningof the sentence. In the second part of the sentence, the modifier "differing. ...is explaining how they did it, and doesn't seem probable that they abandoned the Lutherans by differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

Can anyone explain the changes of meanings in the answer choices A, D & E?

Thanks.

Hi anonimo,
the efforts of Mike in giving even the history perspective is commendable..

Ill give you the answer from perspective of someone, who is not aware of the background to conflict..

The Q is..
Quote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

You have asked about the choices A, D and E, so i'll restrict to these three choices..

1) whenever you have idioms such as not only X but Y, or both .X. and .Y..,
write both parts separately see if it makes sense..

lets see A..

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and they with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

a) you can see "they with the L" is missing the VERB...
had they said-- they broke both with X and with y-- would be correct
b) usage of "which" tells us that " the Roman Catholic Church" resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century-- this is non-sensical meaning..

lets see the D choice

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

As I said we will go with the meaning as given to us, since we are not aware about the event..
I take the meaning " the action of abandoning Lutherans is in CONTRAST to what the fellow Ps believe the DOCTRINES stand for..

lets see the E choice

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.
this choice has two faults..
a) meaning issue:- this wrongly suggests that the Lutherans differed from their..., it was not Ls who differed but the action of abandoning Ls that differed from what fellow ...
b) also:- both and also convey the same meaning--- Redundancy

Hope it helps

Thanks again Mike and chetan2u for your elaborate responses. And to Mike also for the "speech", I think I touched your expertise subject..
What I didn't get is the difference between B and D in the modifiers (who vs differing) and now that you explained that the action of that clause is not done by the Ls but by the whole clause, it solves the grammar problem. Now it is just an understanding problem. ..
Thanks anyways.
Nice work you guys are doing!
Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2016
Posts: 20
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V34
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2017, 22:07
Thank you for the wonderful discussion and your extensive explanations. One thing that comes into my mind is that I previously learned that ing-modifiers after a clause can be used for two Things:
- Describing the WHY of the clause (e.g. I am killing the snake, using a stick.)
- Result of the clause (e.g. I killed the ailing snake, ending its misery.)

In both cases the modifier should go along with the subject (e.g. I am ending its misery.).

In the example of this thread, the modifier can't go along with the subject in my opinion. The subject are the Calvinists. The Calvinists broke with the Romans, resulting in the Religious Wars. However, "The Calvinists resulting in the Religious Wars" isn't possible. Am I wrong that the modifier has to go with the subject?
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1321
Location: Malaysia
Re: When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2017, 15:45
avohden wrote:
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The correct response is (D). The word “both” earlier in the sentence comes before the verb "broke", meaning that the second portion of that structure, after "and", must come with its own verb to be parallel. Choices A and B fail to supply such a verb, and are therefore wrong.

Choices A and C commit another error, using the relative pronoun "which" to start the modifier "which resulted in the Religious Wars" - that modifier needs to describe the action of the Calvinists breaking with the Roman Catholic Church, not the church itself, so the participial modifier "resulting" is necessary.

Choice E commits a redundancy error with the word "also" - since the structure is already set up for "both broke...and abandoned", so "also" is superfluous and incorrect. The correct answer is D.
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2018
Posts: 222
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 580 Q47 V23
GMAT 2: 640 Q49 V27
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2018, 05:19
When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

A. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing -- which refers to the church, i.e, church resulted in the religious wars of the 16th century. This is non-sensical. ELIMINATED

B. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed -- "and the Lutherans, who differed", makes the second part of the sentence a run on statement. It doesn't link with first part. ELIMINATED

C. which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed -- same error as in A. ELIMINATED

D. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing -- CORRECT. It restores the meaning of the sentence.

E. resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed -- "also" can be used when we have either "not" or "not only" in a sentence. "who" is redundant here. ELIMINATED

OPTION: D
_________________

____________________________
Regards,

Chaitanya

+1 Kudos

if you like my explanation!!!

When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doc   [#permalink] 18 Nov 2018, 05:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by