Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 02:17 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 02:17
Close
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
Your Progress

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
DensetsuNo
Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Last visit: 05 Aug 2023
Posts: 90
Own Kudos:
854
 [32]
Given Kudos: 38
Status:2 months to go
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
Posts: 90
Kudos: 854
 [32]
Kudos
Add Kudos
32
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
varundixitmro2512
Joined: 04 Apr 2015
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 75
Own Kudos:
320
 [1]
Given Kudos: 3,991
Posts: 75
Kudos: 320
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
DensetsuNo
Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Last visit: 05 Aug 2023
Posts: 90
Own Kudos:
854
 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Status:2 months to go
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
Posts: 90
Kudos: 854
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
kannu44
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Last visit: 22 Sep 2021
Posts: 85
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.75
WE:Consulting (Energy)
Posts: 85
Kudos: 73
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Explaination from Magoosh site:
illogical comparison. Choice (C) uses the comparative structure “instead of Amerigo Vespucci.” Logically, we know that the comparison is with Columbus, but that is not clear grammatically, because the “instead of” phrase is nowhere close to the mention of Columbus. The juxtaposition “he was in East Asia, instead of Amerigo Vespucci” illogical suggests that Amerigo Vespucci was a place in contrast to East Asia. Choice (C) is incorrect.
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,419
 [4]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,419
 [4]
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
While Columbus is generally cited as the European who "discovered" America, thinking that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci correctly deducing that the New World was a landmass previously unknown to the Europeans.

The issue is about sentence structure. As we know, every complex sentence entails a subordinate clause and a main clause. Without the main clause in place, the sentence will only be a fragment. The sentence here is a complex- compound sentence, a combination of a complex and an additional IC conjugated by a coordinator.

A) thinking that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci correctly deducing --- No accompanying main IC for the subordinate clause. A fragment
B) he thought that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci who correctly deduced -- A correct grammatical sentence.
C) he thought that he was in East Asia, instead of Amerigo Vespucci who correctly deduced --- This sentence weirdly means that Columbus was in East Asia rather than in Amerigo Vespucci.
D) thinking that he was in East Asia, but Amerigo Vespucci correctly deduced-- same fragmentation problem as in A; the main clause is missed.
E) in East Asia according to his thought, and Amerigo Vespucci correctly deduced-- The fragmentation problem plus an absurd meaning as "discovered America in East Asia".
User avatar
Mahmud6
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 387
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 235
Status:The best is yet to come.....
Posts: 387
Kudos: 881
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
DensetsuNo
Quote:
While Columbus is generally cited as the European who "discovered" America, thinking that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci correctly deducing that the New World was a landmass previously unknown to the Europeans.

A) thinking that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci correctly deducing
B) he thought that he was in East Asia, and it was Amerigo Vespucci who correctly deduced
C) he thought that he was in East Asia, instead of Amerigo Vespucci who correctly deduced
D) thinking that he was in East Asia, but Amerigo Vespucci correctly deduced
E) in East Asia according to his thought, and Amerigo Vespucci correctly deduced

I find this question odd, but it's yours to enjoy.

Kudos if you like.

OA will be posted tonight.


OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:



Split #1: all choices begin with the “while” clause, and then four of the five have a phrase or clause, then a conjunction (“and” or “but”), and another independent clause. Since the “while” clause is a subordinate clause, and since the conjunction must join two independent clauses, what begins the underlined section in these choices must also be an independent clause. Let’s look at these:

(A) thinking that he was in East Asia = NOT an independent clause

(B) he thought that he was in East Asia = YES, an independent clause

(C) [different structure]

(D) thinking that he was in East Asia = NOT an independent clause

(E) in East Asia according to his thought = NOT an independent clause

Right away, we can eliminate choices (A), (D), and (E).

Split #2: illogical comparison. Choice (C) uses the comparative structure “instead of Amerigo Vespucci.” Logically, we know that the comparison is with Columbus, but that is not clear grammatically, because the “instead of” phrase is nowhere close to the mention of Columbus. The juxtaposition “he was in East Asia, instead of Amerigo Vespucci” illogical suggests that Amerigo Vespucci was a place in contrast to East Asia. Choice (C) is incorrect.

The only possible answer is (B), which makes effective and perfectly appropriate use of the emphatic structure.

https://magoosh.com/gmat/2014/the-empty ... orrection/
User avatar
Mahmud6
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 387
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 235
Status:The best is yet to come.....
Posts: 387
Kudos: 881
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mikemcgarry

Dear Friend,

Regarding to the following, I have two questions in my minds.

Quote:
all choices begin with .......... a conjunction (“and” or “but”), and another independent clause....and since the conjunction must join two independent clauses
1. Does the conjunction always join two IC?

2. Is 'comma plus FANBOYS' an indicator of the presence of two IC’s?

Your opinion is highly solicited. Thanks in advance.
User avatar
Mahmud6
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 387
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 235
Status:The best is yet to come.....
Posts: 387
Kudos: 881
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mahmud6
mikemcgarry

Dear Friend,

Regarding to the following, I have two questions in my minds.

Quote:
all choices begin with .......... a conjunction (“and” or “but”), and another independent clause....and since the conjunction must join two independent clauses
1. Does the conjunction always join two IC?

2. Is 'comma plus FANBOYS' an indicator of the presence of two IC’s?

Your opinion is highly solicited. Thanks in advance.
Yes, I have got my answers from https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-people-o ... 66598.html
Quote:

Well, that's a bit simplistic, because sentences can be considerably more complicated than those you quoted. For example,
While he was still a student, and before he had published any significant papers, Einstein began to ponder the ideas that lead to Relativity.
Notice, there we have a comma + "and" construction, but it joins two subordinate clauses, not two independent clauses. It's true that "and" links things in parallel, so it would not link one subordinate clause to one independent clause --- it would have to link like-to-like. In my sentence at the top of this thread, the two subordinate "that"-clauses are linked by the word "and."
It's absolutely true that you can't just stick two independent clauses next to each other separated by a comma splice ----
I ate breakfast, I went to school.
That's a run-on sentence. See
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/run-on-sen ... questions/
It's absolutely true that, to avoid a run-on sentence, you need to join two independent clauses with the word "and" as well as a comma. BUT, from that, you cannot conclude that all clauses joined by "and" + comma have to be independent. In more complicated sentences, you can join two subordinate clauses by "and" + comma as well.
Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,832
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,832
Kudos: 986
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
189 posts