Not only did the systematic clearing of forests

[JJ]

GWD-8-Q20:
Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

A. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
B. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast), which gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
C. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
D. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
E. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it


I chose E, the answer is D, but I did suspect the OA is wrong.

Anyone?

[StaceyKoprince]

I apologize that we missed your question.

Can you please clarify the source of your question? I don't recognize the terminology GWD-8-Q20. This folder is for verbal questions from GMATPrep only.

[Live Stronger]

This is a GMAT Prep question. I got the same one today. Isn't 'not only ....., but it also ....' construction awkward ?

[RonPurewal]

This is a GMAT Prep question. I got the same one today. Isn't 'not only ....., but it also ....' construction awkward ?

the correct answer, (d), doesn't have that construction.

--

incidentally, note that, even if it were used with proper parallelism, the "not only ... but also" construction still wouldn't be appropriate here.

rhetorically, the "not only ... but also" construction is used for 2 parallel items that reinforce each other.

example:
weight training not only increases muscle mass and strength but also boosts bone density. --> notice that the two effects mentioned are both positive effects.

in this sentence, the 2 effects are contrasting: the first half (farmland/houses/furniture) is positive, but the second half (erosion/deforestation) is negative.
thus, "not only ... but also" is inappropriate; just use traditional "but (also)", by itself, instead. that's exactly what choice (d) does.

[lawrencewwh]

D. The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also

I have 2 question

1st question on logical meaning of the sentence:

The systematic clearing of forests can NOT
gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture ,

instead farmland CAN
gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture,

So I think gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furnitureshould modify the farmland

2nd Question on "it"

in D,

The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also

it can refer to The systematic clearing of forests ,
but the nearest Noun is houses and furniture, so it can also refer to houses and furniture?

Thanks in advance.

[JonathanSchneider]

If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that "clearing" (a gerund) cannot logically "give" consumers anything. But why then argue that "farmland" can? "Farmland" is as inanimate as "clearing." In fact, the GMAT seems to think that either noun can "give" these things to consumers; "give" here is in the sense of "provide."

The "it" clearly refers to "clearing," for two reasons:
1) "houses" is plural, but "it" is singular
2) "clearing" is the subject of the sentence, and we use "it" as a subject pronoun; thus, "clearing" is the most logical antecedent.

[rohit21384]

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

A. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also



Besides other issues in option (a,) "gave "should be "give" in following sentence.
"Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States ......... gave"
did +1st form of the verb............
does gmat test basic things such as this one ?

[RonPurewal]

Besides other issues in option (a,) "gave "should be "give" in following sentence.
"Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States ......... gave"
did +1st form of the verb............
does gmat test basic things such as this one ?

nicely done. that's certainly not "basic"; you have to have a rather sophisticated understanding of english verbs, AND the ability to connect pieces of a verb over a long distance, to understand this one.

[rajinikanth]

Can we use the caused,defroested from the non underlined section for parallelism with created and then split based on created to eliminate A,B and C?

thanks ron, the not only X but also Y was a good lesson.

[gurvindersingh2004]

If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that "clearing" (a gerund) cannot logically "give" consumers anything. But why then argue that "farmland" can? "Farmland" is as inanimate as "clearing." In fact, the GMAT seems to think that either noun can "give" these things to consumers; "give" here is in the sense of "provide."

The "it" clearly refers to "clearing," for two reasons:
1) "houses" is plural, but "it" is singular
2) "clearing" is the subject of the sentence, and we use "it" as a subject pronoun; thus, "clearing" is the most logical antecedent.

The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

Isnt this "The subject,but it also.." construction an example of partallelism?

What if there are 2 singular nouns present in the sentence before",but it also" do we still abide by the "subject noun-subject pronoun concept" you mentioned?

[RonPurewal]

If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that "clearing" (a gerund) cannot logically "give" consumers anything. But why then argue that "farmland" can? "Farmland" is as inanimate as "clearing." In fact, the GMAT seems to think that either noun can "give" these things to consumers; "give" here is in the sense of "provide."

The "it" clearly refers to "clearing," for two reasons:
1) "houses" is plural, but "it" is singular
2) "clearing" is the subject of the sentence, and we use "it" as a subject pronoun; thus, "clearing" is the most logical antecedent.

The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

Isnt this "The subject,but it also.." construction an example of partallelism?

What if there are 2 singular nouns present in the sentence before",but it also" do we still abide by the "subject noun-subject pronoun concept" you mentioned?

in general, technically ambiguous pronouns that are parallel to the correct antecedent -- and are not parallel to any of the wrong antecedents -- are pretty much always tolerated by the gmat.

[sudaif]

I don't understand this construction in choice D

"The great Ron P taught online forum members a lot of good things, but he also scolded them a lot"

that's a joke btw!

the "but [he] also" part of the sentence just seems weird. Is that customary English language?

[RonPurewal]

I don't understand this construction in choice D

"The great Ron P taught online forum members a lot of good things, but he also scolded them a lot"

that's a joke btw!

the "but [he] also" part of the sentence just seems weird. Is that customary English language?

yes. that is absolutely customary usage; it's very common.

it's really no different from any other "but" construction that uses 2 subjects. e.g.
john went to the party, but jim stayed home.
this is the same sort of thing; the only difference is that both of the 2 subjects refer to the same person/thing, so you use a pronoun for the second one.

[nowwithgmat]

can anyone say why option C is incorrect here

[jlucero]

(C) The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, [creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture], but also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

First off, (C) doesn't have a verb in the first half of the sentence:

The clearing of forests.

And since it's not a sentence, you can't include a COMMA + -ING MODIFIER, because this type of modifier needs to modify a clause and not a noun.