While most of the earliest known ball courts in Mesoamerica date to 90

Hello Experts egmat, GMATNinja

I need clarifications on choice D.

My understanding of this choice is:
Subject: the finding
Verb: attests

There is no S-V error.

The only issue is that the intended meaning is changed here.
Use of the phrase "the painting" is making this choice an incorrect one since it points to a specific painting whereas in the original sentence no such meaning is conveyed.

Is this the only error in this option? Or am I missing anything.

Second, in choice A, it states that "waterlogged latex balls .......and representations of ballplayers......attest".
Shouldn't it be the findings that should attest rather than the evidences themselves?

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma

Can someone please explain to me how waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attest are parallel? I thought I had these rules down but now I'm getting confused. I thought E had the most parallel structure, and I still believe it is parallel (correct me if I'm wrong), but I see the SV error and meaning issue in that answer choice now.

Can someone please explain to me how waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attest are parallel? I thought I had these rules down but now I'm getting confused. I thought E had the most parallel structure, and I still believe it is parallel (correct me if I'm wrong), but I see the SV error and meaning issue in that answer choice now.

There's no general rule governing this issue. Context is everything here.

Take another look at (D): "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attests..."

In this option we have two things attesting to the fact that this game was established by the 13th century B.C.: (1) the finding of waterlogged balls at El Manati and (2) the painting of representations of ballplayers found at San Lorenzo.

If we had an "of" before the second element, the parallelism would change. Now, the two elements in bold would be parallel to each other: "the finding (1) of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and (2) of the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attests..." Take a look at that second element now: "the finding... of the painting of representations found at San Lorenzo." We could refer to "the finding of X at San Lorenzo". We could refer to "X found at San Lorenzo". But we can't refer to "the finding of X found at San Lorenzo". That's redundant.

(Of course, others have pointed out that (D) has a subject-verb disagreement: X and Y attests, and this is probably the easiest way to get rid of this option.)

Now let's revisit (E): "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo attest..." The structure is different here: "found" doesn't appear in the second element, so we don't have the redundancy issue anymore. But we still have a subject-verb disagreement: "the finding... attest." So (E) is wrong regardless.

Takeaway (shouted very loudly from a snowy rooftop): it's impossible to memorize every acceptable construction or idiom on the GMAT. With a few exceptions, you're far better off relying on the logic, grammar, and structure of a given option than attempting to rely on an ironclad rule.

I hope that helps!

Hi experts,

I see that this question is discussed in depth, but I did not come across the reason as to why I eliminated Answer Choice (E).

For this part of Answer Choice (E) "While most of the earliest known ball courts in Mesoamerica date to 900???400 b.c., the finding of waterlogged latex balls" ... I found it awkward to for the part before the comma to focus on the "earlier known ball courts" and then to compare it to the "finding of". In my view, it did not make sense to compare a noun to a noun phrase (I believe "the finding of waterlogged latex balls" is a prepositional phrase but am unsure). Either way, these elements of the sentence did not seem to be alike to present this contrast.

Did I incorrectly eliminate Answer Choice (E) for this reason?

Thank you for your time and help in advance!

While most of the earliest known ball courts in Mesoamerica date to 900–400 b.c., waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attest to the fact that the Mesoamerican ballgame was well established by the mid-thirteenth century b.c.

(A) waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attest

(B) waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attests

(C) waterlogged latex balls found at El Manati and ceramics painted with representations of ballplayers found at San Lorenzo attests

(D) the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo attests

(E) the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo attest

@GIMATNINJA


Isnt the subject "finding" here? "of waterlogged latex balls...and the painting of representations.." is just a modifier, isnt it? The verb "attests" should make sense with singular "finding"

Hello Experts,

Can I read the sentence like this? This way it makes complete sense to me.

...The finding of
1. waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and
2. the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo

attests...

The finding can also attest to the fact that the civilisation was older than previously thought. What am I thinking wrong?
AjiteshArun ExpertsGlobal5 GMATNinja KarishmaB

Hello Experts,

Can I read the sentence like this? This way it makes complete sense to me.

...The finding of
1. waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and
2. the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo

attests...

The finding can also attest to the fact that the civilisation was older than previously thought. What am I thinking wrong?
AjiteshArun ExpertsGlobal5 GMATNinja KarishmaB

Hello Experts,

Can I read the sentence like this? This way it makes complete sense to me.

...The finding of
1. waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and
2. the painting of representations of ballplayers on ceramics found at San Lorenzo

attests...

The finding can also attest to the fact that the civilisation was older than previously thought. What am I thinking wrong?
AjiteshArun ExpertsGlobal5 GMATNinja KarishmaB

Hello AndrewN GMATNinja DmitryFarber - I am having some difficulty with Answer choice E, I understand that "the finding" here is the subject but once I saw the "and" I thought the subject is compound, how to best identify the sentence for an answer choice similar to "E", I know it is a silly question, but as a non-native, I am having hard time bisecting the structure and would appreciate your help, thanks!

@GIMATNINJA

Isnt the subject "finding" here? "of waterlogged latex balls...and the painting of representations.." is just a modifier, isnt it? The verb "attests" should make sense with singular "finding"