While some academicians believe that business ethics should be

To whom so ever it may concern; On this topic, I have a small note to add

Coordinate adjectives are adjectives that modify a single noun and are not joined by any conjunctions. For example, we say an amazing, mammoth procession. The adjectives ‘amazing and mammoth’ both refer to the procession and are not joined the usual ‘and’. A comma is used to separate both the adjectives, In effect it means an amazing and mammoth procession.

You can use coordinate adjectives only when the adjectives can individually modify the same noun as in the above case. More importantly even if you reverse the order of the adjectives, it should mean the same thing. Whether it is an amazing mammoth procession or a mammoth amazing procession, it means the same.

On the contrary try to reverse the order of the adjectives in the following cases.

I am longing for a hot, lemon tea; I am longing for a lemon, hot tea.

The previous, stout woman cooking in the kitchen is my wife; the stout, previous woman cooking in the kitchen is my wife

You can see the absurdity of reversing the order of the adjectives in the above cases. These are called cumulative adjectives.

Separate, required are coordinate adjectives modifying 'course'. They are legitimate
_________________

This is a conditional statement. Remember would never appears in the if clause. A & E out

We need to fix if clause based on the rest of the sentence. will take ethics seriously ( will + base verb means if clause should be in present tense ) D is out

C moves only to the middle of the sentence and changes the meaning by adding the adverb separately.

B correctly uses adjectives to modify the noun and remains

The difference between (B) and (C) is the placement of 'only', which changes the meaning. Let's start with (B).

B) only if it is taught as a separate, required course

The meaning of 'ethics will only be taught if...' is that the other alternative would be to not teach ethics. Notice the placement of 'only' is right before 'taught.'

C) if it is taught only as a course required separately

Here the debate is no longer whether ethics will be taught, but how it will be taught. Essentially (C) is saying that ethics will not be taught as a combined course or an integrated course, or any course for that matter. It will taught only as a separate course. This changes the original meaning of the sentence.

Hope that helps!
_________________

Problem here in C is the misplaced modifier ‘only. Normally, the limiting adverb ‘only’ modifies an action that follows it. In this thread –only- modifies the verb of teaching in A and B; whereas in C it modifies the course, which changes the meaning, that the students will take it, if is not taught as a course but as something else such as in a symposium or seminar.
With regard to course required separately, the adverb tends to modify the noun –course-; and modifying a noun is not the function of an adverb; an adverb can only modify a verb or adjective. If it were --separately required course --, then it will be ok, since the adverb –separately- now modifies the adjective required.

In C, the term required is not a verb; it is past participle and adjective modifying the noun -course-.
_________________

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is both separate and required.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Tenses

• Habitual actions are best conveyed through the simple present tense.
• The simple future tense is used to refer to actions that will take place in the future.
• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.

A: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "separately required course"; the use of the adverb "separately" to modify the adjective "required" incorrectly implies that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is required in a separate manner; the intended meaning is that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is both separate and required. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the simple future tense verb "would be taught" to refer to a hypothetical habitual action; please remember, habitual actions are best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the simple future tense is used to refer to actions that will take place in the future.

B: Correct. The sentence formed by this answer choice uses the phrases "take ethics seriously only if" and "separate, required course"; the use of the adverb "only" to modify the verb phrase "take...seriously" and the use of the adjective "separate" to modify "course" correctly imply that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is both separate and required. Further, Option B correctly uses the simple present tense verb "is taught" to refer to a hypothetical habitual action.

C: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "taught only as a course required separately"; the use of the adverb "only" to modify "taught" and the use of the adverb "separately" to modify the adjective "required" incorrectly imply that students will take ethics seriously if the only way it is taught is as a course that is required in a separate manner; the intended meaning is that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is both separate and required.

D: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "taught only"; the use of the adverb "only" to modify "taught" incorrectly implies that students will take ethics seriously if the only way it is taught is as a course that is required and separate; the intended meaning is that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is required and separate. Further, Option D incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "was taught" to refer to a hypothetical habitual action; please remember, habitual actions are best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "only be taught as a required course, separately"; the use of the adverb "only" to modify "taught" and the use of the adverb "separately" to modify the adjective "required" incorrectly imply that students will take ethics seriously if the only way it is taught is as a course that is required in a separate manner; the intended meaning is that students will take ethics seriously only if it is taught as a course that is both separate and required. Further, Option E incorrectly uses the simple future tense verb "would...be taught" to refer to a hypothetical habitual action; please remember, habitual actions are best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the simple future tense is used to refer to actions that will take place in the future.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

B is the right one.

Understand the meaning. Removing modifiers and clauses, the sentence simply means "Students will take this subject seriously ONLY if it is taught as separate course."

C is flawed in multiple ways.
- Placement of 'only'
- "course required separately" doesn't mean the same thing as "separate, required course."
- In correct choice separate and required are two modifiers - adjectives - modifying the noun 'course'. Which is the right way.
- In C separately modifies verb require and acts as adverb. - wrong

I am happy to help!
Rule: If...Then construction.
If Present......Then Present(is/am/are..etc)/May/Will

If Past...........Then Simple Past
Past Perfect......Would have.

So, As per the rule...A,D,E out.
Between B and C. C change the intended meaning.
So, B.

Hope this helps!

I would like to know whether we can use two items in a series without any conjunction like in this sentence - separate, required course. It sounds a little awkward.

Dear Ergenekon,

Good question indeed.

Let’s look at another sentence to understand what’s going on in the correct answer to the official question. Consider the following simple sentence:

Emily was a smart, young girl.

In the above sentence, the words smart and young correctly describe the noun girl. Do you agree to that? If yes, do you see how the words smart and required play a similar role in the sentence referred to by you?

Please do let me know what you think.

Regards,
Neeti.
_________________

"I'll refer only GMAC approved study material". Is the sentence correct? If yes, then here a noun follows only.

Amit.

"I'll refer only GMAC approved study material". Is the sentence correct? If yes, then here a noun follows only.

In your example. only modifies not GMAC but 'GMAC- approved' -- in fact, it would be better to hyphenate it as I have done. Therefore,'Gmac-approved" is an adjective, which is what only modifies. You may see that even the noun study acts as an adjective in this case. The real noun, namely, material is fr away from the adverb , 'only'; Hope this clarifies.
_________________

Hello daagh
In this question, there are two items in a list used without comma. It seems awkward? Please can you help me understand.

Norgay

Separate and required are called coordinate adjectives and do not require a conjunction between them. A comma will suffice. B the correct grammatical structure.

Pl. see the following link.

https://www.write.com/writing-guides/gen ... djectives/

daagh
_________________

Hi
This was a very informative post.
I want to add one thing- Cumulative adjectives are generally not separated by comma.

Punctuating Coordinate Adjectives and Cumulative Adjectives
"Using commas with multiple adjectives is another challenge; fortunately, the rules are straightforward.
1. Can you put the word and between the adjectives and have the sentence still make sense?2. Can you reverse the order of the adjectives and have the sentence still make sense?
If you can do those two things, then use a comma between the adjectives because each adjective is describing the noun. These are called coordinate adjectives.
Aardvark is a hairy and small animal.
Aardvark is a small and hairy animal.Aardvark is a small, hairy animal.
You can use and between the adjectives and reverse the order in the examples above, so you use a comma.

"When your adjectives don't meet the above criteria--when you can't reverse the order or put and between them and have them still make sense--they are called cumulative adjectives. They are adjectives that build on each other, and you don't put a comma between them. For example, in the following sentence, you can't change the order of the adjectives four, green, and Easter:
Squiggly found four green Easter eggs.
Squiggly found green four Easter eggs. (yuck!)
Squiggly found Easter green four eggs. (yuck!)Squiggly found green Easter four eggs. (yuck!)
Remember, you can test whether you're dealing with cumulative or coordinate adjectives by checking if it's possible to switch them around."

Source:https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-cumulative-adjectives-1689815


_________________

Going into the meaning aspect, let us analyze B first.
Meaning:
B) Only if it is taught as a separate (as an exclusive), required (mandatory or compulsory) course. So there are two adjective elements to complete the original intent, i.e.: exclusive and compulsory.
C: if it is taught only as a course required separately- here the word required does not convey compulsoriness. C carries only one of the two intents namely 'exclusiveness'. Here the word 'required' is not meaning compulsoriness. To that extent, the original meaning is fractured. This is just a ploy of vocabulary.
_________________

While some academicians believe that business ethics should be integrated into every business course, others say that students will take ethics seriously [u]only if it would be taught as a separately required course

(A) only if it would be taught as a separately required course

Is the tense, 'would be taught' correctly used in the original sentence? Should we eliminate this option based on the tense?

Kindly clarify,

Absolutely correct @sagarsangani123; more than looking at it from a tense perspective, this is basically a wrong conditional construct.

It's actually a handy little thing to remember that the if portion (in this case if it would be taught as a separately required course should never have a will/would).

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses conditional constructs, their application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

Hello experts,
Regarding answer choice C, except for the meaning issue (not logical contrast) several posts refer about the erroneous use of "separately" so I want to make sure that I know the exact reason why it is considered wrong. Is it because separately is an adverb and in answer choice C it does not have a proper verb to modify? (if somehow we were able to put it close to "taught" then its usage would be ok right) ?

Hi UNSTOPPABLE12,

It's not that there is no verb (form) for separately in option C (it clearly points to required, a participle). The problem is that "required separately" doesn't make sense here.

1. a course required separately ~ The course is {required in a separate way}.
2. a separate, required course ~ The course is {a separate course} and it is also {a required course}.
_________________