Maya and Aztec

[andrew_N]

What is wrong with C? This is a GmatPrep question.

During the same period in which the Maya were developing a hieroglyphic system of writing, the Aztec people also developed a written language, but it was not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya and was more pictographic in nature.

A. but it was not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya and was

B. but it was not as highly sophisticated ad the Maya, being

C. but, not as highly sophisticated as the Maya's, was

D. not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya, however, being

E. not as highly sophisticated as the Maya's however, it was

[RonPurewal]

there are at least the following 2 things, one of which is an absolute and one of which is a preference.

absolute:
'not as ... maya' is an appositive modifier (i.e., a descriptive modifier introduced without benefit of auxiliary words like relative pronouns or prepositions). such appositive modifiers must immediately follow the nouns they describe.
for this modifier to be used correctly, then, it must be used as follows: the Aztecs' language, not as sophisticated as the Maya's, was ...

preference:
the two descriptions given should be grammatically parallel, since they are logically parallel (both are comparisons with the mayan writing system, and neither is subordinated to, dependent on, or emphasized over the other in any way). this sentence needlessly, and at cost to its clarity of meaning, subordinates one of the two observations as an appositive modifier.

[Guest]

What is OA?

[StaceyKoprince]

A

[Guest660]

the two descriptions given should be grammatically parallel, since they are logically parallel (both are comparisons with the mayan writing system, and neither is subordinated to, dependent on, or emphasized over the other in any way). this sentence needlessly, and at cost to its clarity of meaning, subordinates one of the two observations as an appositive modifier.

Hey Ron..could you explain this in detail...thanks

[rfernandez]

I'm not Ron, but if I can be so bold...

The sentence is trying to say two things about the Aztec written language:
1 - it was not as highly sophisticated as the Mayan written language
2 - it was more pictographic in nature

These are two independent ideas, and one is not more important than the other. They should be treated equally in the sentence as a result, so a parallel structure would be logical. Option C, however, expresses each descriptor differently, one in an appositive (which somewhat diminishes its prominence) and the other in a clause. It's unnecessary to do so.

[shobujgmat]

IS "it" clearly refers to a written language?

What is the wrong with E ( i think, it has a modification error)

[RonPurewal]

there's also a bigger problem with (c).

if you have a construction such as
X did Y and did Z (note the lack of a subject in front of "did Z")
then X is automatically assumed to be the subject of BOTH "did Y" and "did Z".

for instance:
the cat ate the mouse and jumped up onto the table.
this means:
* the cat ate the mouse
* the cat jumped up onto the table

in choice (c), there is no new subject in front of "was", so that choice illogically suggests that the aztec people themselves were "not as highly sophisticated as that of the maya".
that doesn't make any sense.

[lawrencewwh]

During the same period in which the Maya were developing a hieroglyphic system of writing, the Aztec people also developed a written language, but it was not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya and was more pictographic in nature.

(A) but it was not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya and was


I have a question about the pronoun "IT"maybe refers to " the Aztec people",
Because this sentence is parallel, so the subject of
"but it was not as highly sophisticated as that of the Maya and was more pictographic in nature.
May have the same object in the former clause "the Aztec people also developed a written language "ï¼Ÿ
So " IT" maybe be refers to " the Aztec people" & "a written language" at the same time ?

Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

So " IT" maybe be refers to " the Aztec people" & "a written language" at the same time ?

no sir. english pronouns are not allowed to have two antecedents simultaneously.

also, "the Aztec people" is plural, and so cannot be the antecedent of the singular pronoun "it".
(reasons:
1, "people" is plural by default. there are certain very specific instances in which "people" is singular, but those are exceptional.
2, "the Maya", appearing earlier in the sentence, is also plural, and the two concepts are parallel.)

that leaves "a written language" as the unique antecedent.

[stock.mojo11]

Ron/Rey,

Isnt the comparison in C & E ambiguous?

Maya's might be Maya's themselves. Isnt it?

[RonPurewal]

Ron/Rey,

Isnt the comparison in C & E ambiguous?

Maya's might be Maya's themselves. Isnt it?

no. impossible.

first, that would simply be incorrect. you NEVER pluralize words with apostrophe + s.
the only exceptions to this, off the top of my head, are letters and numbers (A's, 1980's).

second, the sentence already uses "the Maya" to mean the people themselves, in the non-underlined part. sentences are NEVER inconsistent with themselves, so the only way in which you could write this in the following part(s) is still the same: "the Maya".

[vivekwrites]

Ron, what is wrong with E. Is it meaning. I do realize that A is the best.

However is a conjunction joining 'Aztec people also developed a written language' and 'it was more pictographic in nature' with 'not as highly sophisticated as the Maya's' as modifier to second clause. So nothing grammatically wrong with this choice. Please let me know if I am wrong.

[RonPurewal]

Ron, what is wrong with E. Is it meaning. I do realize that A is the best.

However is a conjunction joining 'Aztec people also developed a written language' and 'it was more pictographic in nature' with 'not as highly sophisticated as the Maya's' as modifier to second clause. So nothing grammatically wrong with this choice. Please let me know if I am wrong.

no, the use of "however" in (e) is wrong. in fact, it's wrong in 2 ways.

first, the punctuation used in that choice is universally wrong. you can NEVER put a comma only after a conjunction.
let's try this in another sentence:
i read the book and, i also watched the movie.
this should look ridiculous. if it doesn't look absolutely awful, IMMEDIATELY, you may want to consider heading to a public library and checking out an american junior-high- or early high-school-level grammar book, and looking over the parts on punctuation.

second, the words "however" and "therefore" are not used in american english as they're used in british english.
in british english, these words are used as coordinating conjunctions, in the same way as are and, or, yet, and the like. in american english, on the other hand, you CANNOT use them as coordinating conjunctions; you have to use them in the same way as words/constructions such as nevertheless, despite all of these things, etc.

for instance:
i left home twenty minutes early, however i was still late. --> i think this is correct british usage, but it is WRONG WRONG WRONG in american english.
i left home twenty minutes early; however, i was still late. --> correct american usage. note the semicolon (which could also be a period, if these were longer sentences) and the comma, BOTH of which are essential.

[vivekwrites]

Thanks Ron for the explanation. It makes sense.