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

Hey TheUltimateWinner

Happy to help.

You're right about A and C, but not about E.


In E, 'painted' modifies 'representations', just as it does in choice A. The structure of E is:

The finding of A and of B attest to...

Where B = representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo.

The salient errors in choice E are:

1. SVA Error: Finding -> attests
2. Meaning Error: The finding does not attest. The latex balls and the representations attest...
3. Meaning Distortion: The ceramics were found at San Lorenzo, the representations were not painted (on ceramics) at San Lorenzo.

I hope this answers your query.


Happy Learning!

Abhishek
_________________

Hello egmat
Thanks for the reply, but I think that the choice E says like below..
(E) the finding [of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers] painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo attest
It seems that the the finding and painted need to be applied to both waterlogged latex balls and representations of ballplayers

AjiteshArun, GMATNinja, MartyTargetTestPrep, RonPurewal
Can you join the discussion, please? Actually, these types of modifier hurt me a lot!
_________________

Just looking at the answer choices, attest and attests forms of verb tell us about subject verb disagreement in option B C & D- so eliminate.

Option E - parallelism error - finding and painted can not co.e together - eliminate E.

A is the correct which use accurate Parallelism.

Posted from my mobile device

Hey TheUltimateWinner

You're analysis is incorrect, unfortunately. You've placed the parentheses in the wrong place:

Choice E: The finding [of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati] and [of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo] attest ...

This is why "painted" modifies the noun "representations", the closest and most logical modified entity.


Hope this helps.

Best,

Abhishek
_________________

If that were the case, we'd have "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo." So they found a thing at one place... painted on ceramics at another place? So what was painted on the ceramics? Scenes from El Manati with some little waterlogged latex balls scattered about? And the balls were painted in such a way that researchers thousands of years later were able to discern that those balls -- painted on ceramics -- were waterlogged? That's a HUGE stretch.

It makes a lot more sense that they found one thing at one place and another thing at another place: "the finding of [X] at [Place 1] and of [Y] at [Place 2] attest..."

More importantly, (E) has a subject-verb agreement error, so it really doesn't deserve any further analysis.

I hope that helps!
_________________

GMATNinja
So, are you meaning that
the finding of [X] at [Place 1] and the finding of [Y] at [Place 2]--> just 2 findings? if this is the case then we got a subjects, consists of 2 things. That means subject-verb agreement is ok-we don't need an 's' after 'attest'. Maybe I am missing something that you want to mean? Sorry for that..
_________________

You would need to actually repeat "finding" if you wanted to make the subject plural:

• the finding of X and the finding of Y = plural (compound subject)
• the finding of X and of Y = singular, even though you found two things -- the modifiers don't change the simple, singular subject

So (E) is definitely out!
_________________

GMATNinja
The highlighted part issue was my pain, now it is resolved. Thanks and kudos to you for your nice explanation as usual.
_________________

In option E, can't one interpret "the finding of waterlogged balls AND the find of representations" as two elements joined by AND, thereby requiring a plural attest?

While I understand the meaning error in this sentence, wanted to clarify the SVA. Thanks

Hello bullishdutta,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, although you are correct that "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers" and "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and the finding of representations of ballplayers" convey the same meaning, we cannot simply expand the original phrase in this way, at will. In such a case, it is not that the second instance of "finding" has been omitted, rather two prepositional phrases modify the same noun "finding". Conceptually, what the original phrase refers to is the collective, singular, finding of the balls and the representations

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

A plural in the modifier doesn't make the noun plural.

"The discovery of the Titanic and of all the treasures it held" is still one discovery. So "The finding of waterlogged balls and of representations..." is still one finding. If I want it to be plural, I would say "The findings of the balls and of the representations."
_________________

Option (A) is the correct choice:

"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."

The subject of the sentence is "waterlogged latex balls" and "representations of ballplayers," which are two separate items that both attest to the well-established nature of the Mesoamerican ballgame. Therefore, the verb "attest" should be in the plural form "attest" rather than the singular "attests."

Option (B) and (C) both use the singular verb form "attests," which is incorrect. Option (C) also changes the phrasing of the sentence by removing the word "painted" after "ceramics," which alters the meaning.

Option (D) and (E) both use the phrase "the finding of waterlogged latex balls" instead of "waterlogged latex balls found," which makes the sentence unnecessarily wordy. Option (E) also changes the phrasing by placing "of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo" after "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati," which makes the sentence more difficult to read and understand.

I have a question regarding option E and option A:

What if option E read as "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo attests "? Would our answer choice change from A to E?

IMO: It should not because there is still nothing wrong with A which demands a correction and active form is simpler than passive a form, but please do correct me if i'm wrong.

If option E were to read as "the finding of waterlogged latex balls at El Manati and of representations of ballplayers painted on ceramics at San Lorenzo attests," it would still be incorrect.

The subject in this sentence is plural (the finding of two things), so the verb should also be plural, which is "attest." Option A remains the best choice because it maintains subject-verb agreement and uses active voice, making it simpler and clearer.
_________________

GMATNinja and Experts
Hello Sir,
(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 choice D, it seems that ballplayers on ceramics don't make any sense, do it? One more thing: should it be ''painting of representations'' or ''painting of ballplayers''?
Thanks_
_________________