Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 21:23 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 21:23
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   
705-805 Level|   Parallelism|            
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [2]
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 19 Apr 2022, 06:08
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Namangupta1997


Hi AndrewN

So can we conclude if we face a situation like this, when we are torn between 2 options in which one has an erroneous idiomatic usage and the other has a parallelism flaw, we should opt for the choice that has a correct idiomatic usage ? Does the GMAT considers unidiomatic usage more wrong than faulty parallelism ?
Show more
Hello, Namangupta1997. I agree with the reply that PyjamaScientist has written above. You should not look to create some sort of hierarchy of potential issues with SC questions. Rather, you want to get behind the answer choice that you find hardest to argue against, using your own logic. Parallelism does not have to be strictly parallel. For instance, look at the two participles—dressed and using—in this classic official question. You may also find this response (to another official question) by GMATNinja to be helpful, in which he makes the point that verb tenses do not need to follow strict parallelism either.

Most idioms that appear on the exam today are not used as the sole basis for a test-taker to determine the correct answer, unless they are structural idioms: neither X nor Y, from X to Y, and so on. Do not sweat the small stuff.

Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
User avatar
Namangupta1997
User avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2020
Last visit: 05 Apr 2025
Posts: 145
Own Kudos:
8
Given Kudos: 63
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
Posts: 145
Kudos: 8
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 19 Apr 2022, 08:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
Namangupta1997


Hi AndrewN

So can we conclude if we face a situation like this, when we are torn between 2 options in which one has an erroneous idiomatic usage and the other has a parallelism flaw, we should opt for the choice that has a correct idiomatic usage ? Does the GMAT considers unidiomatic usage more wrong than faulty parallelism ?
Hello, Namangupta1997. I agree with the reply that PyjamaScientist has written above. You should not look to create some sort of hierarchy of potential issues with SC questions. Rather, you want to get behind the answer choice that you find hardest to argue against, using your own logic. Parallelism does not have to be strictly parallel. For instance, look at the two participles—dressed and using—in this classic official question. You may also find this response (to another official question) by GMATNinja to be helpful, in which he makes the point that verb tenses do not need to follow strict parallelism either.

Most idioms that appear on the exam today are not used as the sole basis for a test-taker to determine the correct answer, unless they are structural idioms: neither X nor Y, from X to Y, and so on. Do not sweat the small stuff.

Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
Show more

Hi AndrewN

I agree tenses don't necessarily have to be parallel. But suppose if there is only one tense prevalent in the entire sentence, like the sentence at hand, isn't it better and more parallel to keep all the clauses in same tense? Do we really have a strong reason to switch to present continuous when the same meaning is reflected by the simple present , which is the tense used in other clauses ?

Also, you mentioned about looking for the meaning difference. I try my best to really get behind the meaning and logic, but I missed this one. This makes me doubt my thinking process. And I want to correct it so I don't repeat the same mistake. That's why I wanted to know if incorrect idioms are more wrong than faulty parallelism. But I conclude from your explanation, there is no straight answer. Meaning trumps everything and we can't make rigid rules.
Is my understanding correct ?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 19 Apr 2022, 09:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Namangupta1997
Hi AndrewN

I agree tenses don't necessarily have to be parallel. But suppose if there is only one tense prevalent in the entire sentence, like the sentence at hand, isn't it better and more parallel to keep all the clauses in same tense? Do we really have a strong reason to switch to present continuous when the same meaning is reflected by the simple present , which is the tense used in other clauses ?

Also, you mentioned about looking for the meaning difference. I try my best to really get behind the meaning and logic, but I missed this one. This makes me doubt my thinking process. And I want to correct it so I don't repeat the same mistake. That's why I wanted to know if incorrect idioms are more wrong than faulty parallelism. But I conclude from your explanation, there is no straight answer. Meaning trumps everything and we can't make rigid rules.
Is my understanding correct ?
Show more
Yes, there is no straight answer. Many upper-level questions touch on meaning in a way that others do not, so you have to be ready to think about what the sentence seems to be conveying. Also, keep in mind that not every split proves decisive. Sometimes there are simply two ways of getting the same point across, so it can be less a matter of which one may be preferred, more a matter of whether either one is incorrect. Look to issues you are more comfortable assessing first, and deal with the nitty-gritty later if you have to. Just do not go into auto-pilot and follow something such as parallelism blindly. Have a reason to select one answer choice over another, even if the disfavored option comes down to little more than a doubt.

Thank you for following up.

- Andrew
User avatar
PyjamaScientist
User avatar
Admitted - Which School Forum Moderator
Joined: 25 Oct 2020
Last visit: 05 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,118
Own Kudos:
1,307
 [1]
Given Kudos: 633
Schools: Ross '25 (M$)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Ross '25 (M$)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
Posts: 1,118
Kudos: 1,307
 [1]
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 19 Apr 2022, 09:41
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Namangupta1997

Hi AndrewN

I agree tenses don't necessarily have to be parallel. But suppose if there is only one tense prevalent in the entire sentence, like the sentence at hand, isn't it better and more parallel to keep all the clauses in same tense? Do we really have a strong reason to switch to present continuous when the same meaning is reflected by the simple present , which is the tense used in other clauses ?

Also, you mentioned about looking for the meaning difference. I try my best to really get behind the meaning and logic, but I missed this one. This makes me doubt my thinking process. And I want to correct it so I don't repeat the same mistake. That's why I wanted to know if incorrect idioms are more wrong than faulty parallelism. But I conclude from your explanation, there is no straight answer. Meaning trumps everything and we can't make rigid rules.
Is my understanding correct ?
Show more
We are dealing here with the English "language". And like any language, the primary role of tenses is to convey the correct flow of events/ideas. So, it all depends upon what idea you want to convey and how you want to convey it. Whether one should maintain the entire thread of thoughts in singular present tense or incorporate other tenses in the sentence, all depends upon the context and what you want to convey through your sentence. So, judge the shift in tense on the merit of "whether it makes sense to shift from one tense to another". If not, then look for an answer choice that uses the same tense and conveys the meaning more aptly.
Quote:
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.
Show more
In the question at hand. If you are referring to "reducing" after "suggest" then it really isn't a present continuous. It's a "gerund" depicting an action. If it's the "are calling" part that you feel is unnecessarily written in present continuous then you are placing too much weightage on this seemingly "flawed style" of writing over "flow/meaning of the sentence".
If you read AndrewN 's original analysis of the question, he has "meticulously" elaborated reasons to eliminate (C) over (E). And if you go through the answers posted by sayantanc2k in the thread, you'd see, he has explained why the meaning of the sentence bends the needle towards (E). Also, if you go through the questions that Andrew has linked in his previous post, you'd see that in this question, the context required a shift in tenses from present tense to past tense to past perfect. So, I'd highly recommend you try to absorb that structure and see for yourself why such verb tenses are not the sole reason to eliminate/reject an answer choice.
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 19 Apr 2022, 10:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Would just like to reiterate what my esteemed colleagues have mentioned in the previous posts: same tense is not a requirement for parallelism.

It is the context that decides which tense should be used in which part of the sentence.

For example:

Naman decided to prepare for GMAT, and now he is preparing for it.

Notice that this is a valid sentence and parallelism is between the following two Independent clauses:

(i) Naman decided to prepare for GMAT
(ii) now he is preparing for it.

The first clause is in simple past tense while the second is in present continuous. But that's completely fine and doesn't affect parallelism in any manner.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana mentions this aspect of parallelism. Have attached the corresponding section of the book, for your reference.
Attachments

Parallelism and Tenses.pdf [446.19 KiB]
Downloaded 74 times

User avatar
Mavisdu1017
User avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 360
Kudos: 46
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 21 Apr 2022, 05:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello expert,
I know in C, “for decreasing” is not as good as “to decrease”, but in E, “are calling for” breaks the parallelism. That means both the choices are not perfect, so I cannot distinguish which one is better than the other?(OR which one takes more serious issue?)
Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Need your opinions and thanks.
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,193
Own Kudos:
4,760
 [1]
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,193
Kudos: 4,760
 [1]
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 21 Apr 2022, 05:20
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
Hello expert,
I know in C, “for decreasing” is not as good as “to decrease”, but in E, “are calling for” breaks the parallelism. That means both the choices are not perfect, so I cannot distinguish which one is better than the other?(OR which one takes more serious issue?)
Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Need your opinions and thanks.
Show more

Hello Mavisdu1017,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option E does not actually break parallelism; the structure formed by Option E is "While some propose to combat..." (modifying phrase) + "others suggest reducing software prices..." (independent clause) + "others are calling for the prosecution..." (independent clause).

"are calling for" is a part of an independent clause that is linked to another independent clause through the "comma + conjunction ("and still" in this sentence)" construction; thus, it does not break parallelism.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
User avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 360
Kudos: 46
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 21 Apr 2022, 07:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5
Mavisdu1017
Hello expert,
I know in C, “for decreasing” is not as good as “to decrease”, but in E, “are calling for” breaks the parallelism. That means both the choices are not perfect, so I cannot distinguish which one is better than the other?(OR which one takes more serious issue?)
Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Need your opinions and thanks.

Hello Mavisdu1017,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option E does not actually break parallelism; the structure formed by Option E is "While some propose to combat..." (modifying phrase) + "others suggest reducing software prices..." (independent clause) + "others are calling for the prosecution..." (independent clause).

"are calling for" is a part of an independent clause that is linked to another independent clause through the "comma + conjunction ("and still" in this sentence)" construction; thus, it does not break parallelism.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Show more
ExpertsGlobal5 hello expert, Sorry I think you didn’t address my question, but maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I mean, non-natives are hard to rule out a choice by incorrect idioms(such as in C), and I think it’s not a friendly way(even kind of unfair) for non-natives to judge a choice only by idioms.

In this question, If I don’t know “for decreasing” is wrongly idiomatic, how can I rule out C? Also, I went through the thread above, many other experts said even the OA is not perfect either, so we must have to choose the less serious one from evils, and that’s why I asked Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Mind to explain further? Thanks
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,193
Own Kudos:
4,760
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,193
Kudos: 4,760
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 22 Apr 2022, 05:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
ExpertsGlobal5
Mavisdu1017
Hello expert,
I know in C, “for decreasing” is not as good as “to decrease”, but in E, “are calling for” breaks the parallelism. That means both the choices are not perfect, so I cannot distinguish which one is better than the other?(OR which one takes more serious issue?)
Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Need your opinions and thanks.

Hello Mavisdu1017,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option E does not actually break parallelism; the structure formed by Option E is "While some propose to combat..." (modifying phrase) + "others suggest reducing software prices..." (independent clause) + "others are calling for the prosecution..." (independent clause).

"are calling for" is a part of an independent clause that is linked to another independent clause through the "comma + conjunction ("and still" in this sentence)" construction; thus, it does not break parallelism.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
ExpertsGlobal5 hello expert, Sorry I think you didn’t address my question, but maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I mean, non-natives are hard to rule out a choice by incorrect idioms(such as in C), and I think it’s not a friendly way(even kind of unfair) for non-natives to judge a choice only by idioms.

In this question, If I don’t know “for decreasing” is wrongly idiomatic, how can I rule out C? Also, I went through the thread above, many other experts said even the OA is not perfect either, so we must have to choose the less serious one from evils, and that’s why I asked Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Mind to explain further? Thanks
Show more

Hello Mavisdu1017,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, firstly, it is rare that the GMAT will expect you to eliminate an answer choice on the basis of idioms alone or where more than one choice will have an identifiable, concrete flaw.

What you need to remember, is that you must not look for the perfect answer choice, but instead for the best among the given answer choices; if you are down to two answer choices and both seem flawed, look for the one whose flaws are less severe - for example, if one option has an ambiguity in meaning but the other has a clear subject-verb disagreement, the former is the superior answer choice.

As a last resort, you can pick the shortest and most direct of the options you are confused between, as it is slightly more likely to be correct; that is one way to identify E as the superior choice here; "suggest reducing" is shorter and more direct than "suggest the reduction of".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,779
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,779
 [2]
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 22 Apr 2022, 07:07
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
ExpertsGlobal5
Mavisdu1017
Hello expert,
I know in C, “for decreasing” is not as good as “to decrease”, but in E, “are calling for” breaks the parallelism. That means both the choices are not perfect, so I cannot distinguish which one is better than the other?(OR which one takes more serious issue?)
Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Need your opinions and thanks.

Hello Mavisdu1017,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option E does not actually break parallelism; the structure formed by Option E is "While some propose to combat..." (modifying phrase) + "others suggest reducing software prices..." (independent clause) + "others are calling for the prosecution..." (independent clause).

"are calling for" is a part of an independent clause that is linked to another independent clause through the "comma + conjunction ("and still" in this sentence)" construction; thus, it does not break parallelism.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
ExpertsGlobal5 hello expert, Sorry I think you didn’t address my question, but maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I mean, non-natives are hard to rule out a choice by incorrect idioms(such as in C), and I think it’s not a friendly way(even kind of unfair) for non-natives to judge a choice only by idioms.

In this question, If I don’t know “for decreasing” is wrongly idiomatic, how can I rule out C? Also, I went through the thread above, many other experts said even the OA is not perfect either, so we must have to choose the less serious one from evils, and that’s why I asked Is there any standard/rule to compare two choices that both are not perfect? Mind to explain further? Thanks
Show more
The good news is that this is a pretty old question, and the GMAT has been trying to move away from idioms.

To answer your question, no, there is no easy-to-follow standard or rule to compare two choices. As stated in the instructions, your job is to, "choose the answer that produces the most effective sentence." So when you're down to two choices, all you can do is compare the differences and start making votes for and against each one.

In this case, it is important to note that, as explained by ExpertsGlobal5, choice (E) does not have a parallelism error at all, so we do not in fact have any substantial votes against choice (E). (C) on the other hand has a couple of possible issues:

  • "Reducing" seems more appropriate than "the reduction" since we are talking about the action of "reducing" prices. The definite article ("the") in "the reduction" makes me think "the reduction" is a thing that already exists or already has happened (a bit like suggesting "THE pasta" at a restaurant). Is "the reduction" grammatically wrong? No, but "reducing" makes the intended meaning a bit clearer.
  • As you noted, "to decrease" is a bit better than "for decreasing." The latter seems to modify the prices themselves, illogically implying that the prices are capable of decreasing the incentive for pirating. Again, is that a concrete error? Definitely not, but the "suggest reducing [X] to decrease [Y]" structure in (E) is easier to follow.

We have two small votes against (C) and zero votes against (E). Again, (E) has two independent clauses separated by a comma+conjunction, so parallelism isn't an issue (not to mention the fact that "suggest" and "are calling" certainly could be parallel verbs, since two verbs do NOT need to have the same tense to be parallel). So (E) is our winner.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
User avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 360
Kudos: 46
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 22 Apr 2022, 07:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I see and thanks for your explanation experts
avatar
okok2023
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2022
Last visit: 14 May 2022
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 10 May 2022, 00:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.

Breaking down the structure
While some propose <<to tackle a problem>> <<Solution 1 i.e. by attempting>>
Others suggest <<Solution 2>>
and still (leftover) others are calling <<Solution 3>>



(A) by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling
No verb for others

(B) by suggesting the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others call
No verb for others

(C) suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call
to decrease should be used as intent is clear

(D) suggest the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling
"If you choose the reduction... you already know that here parallelism is not with "attempting"... and hence, choosing "by calling" for parallelism is incorrect as SV + Solution to combat <the problem> is the parallelism

(E) suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling
avatar
Anhezjel
avatar
Joined: 03 Nov 2016
Last visit: 15 Jun 2022
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 9
Kudos: 1
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 12 May 2022, 12:16
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I don't think anybody has pointed it out:
Options A,B lack much sense for one more reason. They say:
some propose to combat ... by attempting to change ... others by suggesting reducing...

At least for me, it completely makes sense to combat something by attempting to change something, but you don't combat anything by suggesting reducing something. You may "combat violent crime by attempting to reduce social inequalities", but "combating violent crime by suggesting to reduce social inequalities" sounds just stupid.

Then we just remove "for decreasing" because it's a wrong idiom and "suggest reduction" for lack of parallelism.
User avatar
himgkp1990
User avatar
Joined: 21 Jan 2022
Last visit: 19 Dec 2022
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 2
Location: India
Schools: Booth '25 HBS '25 Stanford '25 Kellogg '25
Schools: Booth '25 HBS '25 Stanford '25 Kellogg '25
Posts: 3
Kudos: 2
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 10 Dec 2022, 12:34
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5

1. suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call


2. suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling

I went one of the explanation of yours about use of to vs present participle and I am bit confused now.

suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call


In the above option for decreasing is modifying noun the reduction and as per your explanation it should be correct. Same is the concern with

suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling

In above option to decrease is modifying action reducing which is also correct. Can you help if I am lacking something.
User avatar
TBT
User avatar
Joined: 09 Aug 2020
Last visit: 26 Nov 2023
Posts: 308
Own Kudos:
469
Given Kudos: 494
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
Posts: 308
Kudos: 469
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 15 Jan 2023, 03:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A difficult question. But a good one. Checks logic+comparison. The explanations were a great help!
User avatar
Ritik25
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2021
Last visit: 10 May 2025
Posts: 33
Own Kudos:
17
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 33
Kudos: 17
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 17 May 2023, 11:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone explain as though to a 5 year old how "propose", "suggest" and "are calling" can possibly be parallel in any sense of the imagination?
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [1]
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 17 May 2023, 21:55
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ritik25
Can someone explain as though to a 5 year old how "propose", "suggest" and "are calling" can possibly be parallel in any sense of the imagination?
Show more
Hope you appreciate that following is a correct sentence:

Ritik asked a Verbal question on GMATClub and is now solving Quant questions.

"asked" and "is solving" are parallel. Basically asked and is are both verbs, and hence parallel.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,884
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 06 Jun 2023, 05:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:

While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.


(A) by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling

(B) by suggesting the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others call

(C) suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call

(D) suggest the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling

(E) suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling
Show more


Hi Ritik25

Thank you for your question.


Here's a detailed discussion of this question. Hope this helps. Here goes.

While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.

Sentence Structure Analysis:
  • While some
    • propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs
      • by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating,
  • others
      • by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating,
  • and still others
      • by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.

Aspects of Meaning:
  1. The author wishes to discuss three groups of people with three different solutions to the problem of software piracy.
  2. The first group proposes changing people's attitudes toward pirating.
  3. The second group proposes reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating.
  4. The third group proposes the persecution/punishment of those who copy software illegally.

Error Analysis:
  1. The sentence contains three independent clauses, indicated by the contrast connector "while" and the FANBOYS "and".
  2. All three ICs have subjects - "some", "others", and "still others".
  3. However, only the first subject has a verb "propose". The other two subjects are without verbs.
  4. All three ICs have a by-modifier phrase, but, unlike the first IC, the second and third ICs do not have a verb to be modified by a by-modifier phrase.
  5. Hence, we're looking for an answer choice that provides us with valid verbs for the subjects of IC2 and IC3.

Process of Elimination:
  1. Incorrect. Same as above.
  2. Incorrect. Choice B has a verb for IC3 "call", but there is still no verb for IC2.
  3. Incorrect. All 3 ICs have verbs in choice C. However, this choice has an idiomatic error "suggest X for decreasing Y". The correct idiom is "suggest X to decrease Y". Also, "the reduction of" is wordier and more awkward than "reducing".
  4. Incorrect. Choice D has a verb for IC2, but no verb for IC3. Also, this choice has the same wordiness and awkwardness error of "the reduction of" as opposed to "reducing".
  5. Correct. All three ICs have verbs in choice E. "Reducing" is a lot more concise and appropriate than "the reduction of". "To decrease" is the right idiom.

NOTE:
    A lot of students are worried about the present continuous tense in the final IC of choice E: "are calling". This is believed to be a parallelism error. However, this is not a valid objection. As per the rules of sequence of tenses, although the parallelism of tenses in ICs should be maintained as far as possible, we are allowed to change the tense if the idea requires us to.

    The GMAT does not like to give us overtly proper answers in harder questions. That would make the question too easy. This is why it's important to know your basics and eliminate answer choices on SOLID GROUNDS!


I hope this explanation helped.
Happy learning!
User avatar
SRISH66
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2022
Last visit: 31 Mar 2024
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 43
Posts: 17
Kudos: 3
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 16 Aug 2023, 02:09
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nevergiveup
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.


(A) by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling

(B) by suggesting the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others call

(C) suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call

(D) suggest the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling

(E) suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling
Show more

The sentence can be structured as a list in following way :

While
1. some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating,
2. others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating,
3. and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.

The 3 lists need to be parallel. The structure of the list's first element is noun + verb + prepositional phrase . Hence all other list element as well need to follow the same structure.

We can eliminate A,B and D option

In option C and E, C is incorrect as it uses "for decreasing". The reduction of prices is " with the intent of " decreasing the incentive. Whenever intent has to be presented, correct format is to + verb. Whenever there is no explicit intent and we have to only modify tge noun / verb , for+verb-ing is correct usage.

Answer E is correct
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer 22 Oct 2023, 07:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
While some propose to combat widespread illegal copying of computer programs by attempting to change people's attitudes toward pirating, others by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling for the prosecution of those who copy software illegally.

Option Elimination -
Basics first - After a subordinate clause, we need an independent clause.

(A) by suggesting reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling - There is no "verb" in the sentence after comma others...Wrong. We need an independent clause after the subordinate clause introduced by a subordinating conjunction, "while."

(B) by suggesting the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others call - The part before "and" doesn't have any verb, but the part after and has a verb "call" - wrong parallelism.

(C) suggest the reduction of software prices for decreasing the incentive for pirating, and still others call - We need "to decrease" to show an intent of reducing the software prices.

(D) suggest the reduction of software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others by calling - after "and" no verb but before "and" we have a verb "suggest" - wrong parallelism.

(E) suggest reducing software prices to decrease the incentive for pirating, and still others are calling - okay. We have the verb on both sides. Moreover, "to decrease" is what we need to show intent.
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts