--Imporant---homicide fosiil record, Mary Leakey

[StaceyKoprince]

Yes, there are two different versions of this question. I can't look up the OG 10th edition one right now to see how they explained that one, but it is not unusual to see changes over different editions - they sometimes change their minds on things. Also, explanations are sometimes not the greatest - sometimes, for one explanation, they'll say something doesn't work as though it never works in any circumstances, but all they mean is that it doesn't work for this sentence structure, without explaining exactly why or when it could work. :)

[kevinluocw]

I met the later version too, and it totally confused me.
For parallel, A should be the answer, as the OA
For modifier, D E should be the only choices, but they seems obvious wrong.
Maybe it's a mistake from GMAT itself.

[phuonglink]

I've found 2 versions of this sc and guess that Gmac is trying to test us paralelism, which is the key point to eliminate incorrect answer. Please kindly explain.

[RonPurewal]

I've found 2 versions of this sc and guess that Gmac is trying to test us paralelism, which is the key point to eliminate incorrect answer. Please kindly explain.

please explain what you want us to explain. (: i.e., i don't actually detect a specific question here.

in general, prepositional phrase modifiers are rather flexible (i consider "in addition to" a preposition), while parallelism isn't; that would explain the apparent prioritizing here. in any case, these 2 problems are an excellent learning experience, especially taken in tandem.

[phuonglink]

I've found 2 questions in the prep which have nearly the same content. Despite some slightly changes and different OA, the common testing point gmac wants to test in the 2 questions is paralellism (i think). The two sc are as follows:

1. In addition to her work on the Miocene hominid fossil record, Mary Leakey contributed to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting East African cave paintings.
A. Leakey contributed to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting
B. Leakey contributed to archaeology by her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and by painstakingly documenting
C. Leakey was a contributor to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and with her painstaking documentation of
D. Leakey’s contributions to archaeology include her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and her painstaking documentation of
E. Leakey’s contributions to archaeology include her discovering the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstaking documentation of

2. In addition to her work on the Miocene hominid fossil record, Mary Leakey contributed to archaeology through her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and through her painstaking documentation of East African cave paintings.
A. Mary Leakey contributed to archaeology through her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and through her painstaking documentation of
B. Mary Leakey contributed to archaeology by her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting
C. Mary Leakey was a contributor to archaeology by discovering the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and with her painstaking documentation of
D. Mary Leakey's contributions to archaeology include her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting
E. Mary Leakey's contributions to archaeology include her discovering the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstaking documentation of

OA:
1. D
2. A
What i wish people confirm is whether the testing point here is paralelism.
Thank you

[RonPurewal]

What i wish people confirm is whether the testing point here is paralelism.
Thank you

well -- if the question you're asking is "can this question be decided using parallelism?" then the answer is yes.

it's dangerous to think of gmat questions as though they had a single "testing point", though -- EVERYTHING in the correct answer is useful information.
for instance, in this problem, you have also learned an important lesson about the flexibility of initial modifiers that start with "in addition to" -- like other initial prep. phrases, these modifiers don't have to modify the immediately following subject.

[phuonglink]

What i wish people confirm is whether the testing point here is paralelism.
Thank you

well -- if the question you're asking is "can this question be decided using parallelism?" then the answer is yes.

it's dangerous to think of gmat questions as though they had a single "testing point", though -- EVERYTHING in the correct answer is useful information.
for instance, in this problem, you have also learned an important lesson about the flexibility of initial modifiers that start with "in addition to" -- like other initial prep. phrases, these modifiers don't have to modify the immediately following subject.

thank you for your invaluable guidance Ron, it is much of help

[RonPurewal]

sure.

[eggpain24]

Hi, I just wonder whether "in addition to..." *must* logically modifies the subject of the main clause.
Thanks in advance.

in the way the gmat traditionally uses such modifiers, yes, it would have to modify the subject of the following clause.

again, the gmat is unpredictable, so i'll stop well short of making any sort of guarantees; however, i can confidently say that that's the rule the gmat follows the vast majority of the time, at least.

ron

sorry for bumping such extremely old thread

I get C and D using parallelism

here i get some problems about D

does the change of tense from simple past to simple present can be justified?

also, what is the problem about choice C?

Is it only about the incorrect idiom " a contributor with"( I see this problem from stacey's reply)

[jlucero]

does the change of tense from simple past to simple present can be justified?

It's acceptable here because they change the subject:
Leakey contributed (in the past)...
Her contributions (now) include...

also, what is the problem about choice C?

Is it only about the incorrect idiom " a contributor with"( I see this problem from stacey's reply)

That's the major issue. The other item is that modifiers are a bit more confusing in C:

Leakey was a contributor (to X) (with Y & Z).

Is the second modifier modifying the first modifier or the clause? Not as clear as:

Leakey's contributions (to X) include Y & Z.

[eggpain24]

does the change of tense from simple past to simple present can be justified?

It's acceptable here because they change the subject:
Leakey contributed (in the past)...
Her contributions (now) include...

also, what is the problem about choice C?

Is it only about the incorrect idiom " a contributor with"( I see this problem from stacey's reply)

That's the major issue. The other item is that modifiers are a bit more confusing in C:

Leakey was a contributor (to X) (with Y & Z).

Is the second modifier modifying the first modifier or the clause? Not as clear as:

Leakey's contributions (to X) include Y & Z.

wow

the "with" issue is a good catch

thx for such insight！

[tim]

:)

[AbhilashM94]

does the change of tense from simple past to simple present can be justified?

It's acceptable here because they change the subject:
Leakey contributed (in the past)...
Her contributions (now) include...

also, what is the problem about choice C?

Is it only about the incorrect idiom " a contributor with"( I see this problem from stacey's reply)

That's the major issue. The other item is that modifiers are a bit more confusing in C:

Leakey was a contributor (to X) (with Y & Z).

Is the second modifier modifying the first modifier or the clause? Not as clear as:

Leakey's contributions (to X) include Y & Z.

There are many instances where one modifier modifies another though in gmatprep & OG. Am I wrong?

[RonPurewal]

Yes. As long as the context is clear enough, it's no problem for a modifier to describe something that's in another modifier.

[ElaS308]

In addition to her work on the Miocene hominid fossil record, Mary Leakey contributed to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting East African cave paintings.
A. Leakey contributed to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstakingly documenting
B. Leakey contributed to archaeology by her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and by painstakingly documenting
C. Leakey was a contributor to archaeology with her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and with her painstaking documentation of
D. Leakey’s contributions to archaeology include her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and her painstaking documentation of
E. Leakey’s contributions to archaeology include her discovering the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity and painstaking documentation of

Hi Ron,

I'm trying to understand the parallelism here :

1. her discovery of the earliest direct evidence of hominid activity is parallel to her painstaking documentation of East African cave paintings because both are noun phrase?

2. What is the role of painstaking here? Is it an adjective which is modifying the noun phrase "documentation of East African cave"?

I know the rules of parallelism - nouns can be parallel to another noun as well as complex gerund but nouns cannot be parallel with simple gerund. Only simple gerund can be parallel with simple gerund.

I'm sorry if I'm bothering you with the most basic questions of grammar.