Salt deposits and moisture

[vikas.tarachandani]

Salt deposits and moisture threaten to destroy the Mohenjo-Daro excavation in Pakistan, the site of an ancient civilization that flourished at the same time as the civilizations in the Nile delta and the river valleys of Tigris and Euphrates.

b. that had flourished at the same time as had the civilizations

Hi Ron,

Can you explain what is wrong with option B?
This sentence has two parts. 1st part has 'threatened' which indicates use of 'simple past'. but the second part which uses 'flourished' , happened prior to the instance of 'threatening'. so can't we use past perfect here?

Or to make it simple. the two parts of the above sentence occurred in past, and the other part in distant past. So y the use of past perfect and simple past not legitimate???

[RonPurewal]

Can you explain what is wrong with option B?
This sentence has two parts. 1st part has 'threatened' which indicates use of 'simple past'.

no. hmm?

go back and check out the question again; it contains "threaten" (present tense), not "threatened" (past tense). therefore you don't have a proper timeframe for the past perfect.

[mcmebk]

As helpful as Ron and Tim and Stacy are, I just find the comparison structure the most difficult one to command, even more than verb tenses.

In Ron's examples,

francis ran faster than xavier.
francis ran faster than xavier ran.
francis ran faster than did xavier.
francis ran faster than xavier did.

They all seem to be clear enough, however, in actual tests, they become very ambigous and therefore very difficult to determine what is being compared with what, and if there are any elements omitted (or if omitted wrongly), and then it becomes confusing whether it should be "as" or "like"....

For example:

According to a recent poll, owning and living in a freestanding house on its own land is still a goal of a majority of young adults, like that of earlier generations.

(A) like that of earlier generations
(B) as that for earlier generations
(C) just as earlier generations did
(D) as have earlier generations
(E) as it was of earlier generations

I think I can understand why E is correct, but really feel difficult to understand why A is wrong, I thought "that" can stand for "goal" here, and therefore the sentence is:

owning and living is a goal of young adults like that (a goal) of earlier generations.

The parellal looks fine to me, but it is wrong.

A side question, is it true that in GMAT, "if" can only mean "conditional, e.g. If it rains, I will bring my umbrella", but not "alternative, e.g. it is decisive for the case if he has the proof", and here whether should be used, instead of if.

Thank you all.

[RonPurewal]

I think I can understand why E is correct, but really feel difficult to understand why A is wrong, I thought "that" can stand for "goal" here, and therefore the sentence is:

owning and living is a goal of young adults like that (a goal) of earlier generations.

another consideration that makes clear the incorrectness of choice (a) is the usage of "like".

when you see "like a, xxxxxx" or "xxxxxx, like a", the comparison must be between "a" and the subject of clause "xxxxxx".

therefore, even if that = a goal, you still have an illogical comparison, between that (= "a goal") and owning and living...

A side question, is it true that in GMAT, "if" can only mean "conditional, e.g. If it rains, I will bring my umbrella", but not "alternative, e.g. it is decisive for the case if he has the proof", and here whether should be used, instead of if.

Thank you all.

you are correct: "if" cannot be used to mean "whether".

[mcmebk]

I think I can understand why E is correct, but really feel difficult to understand why A is wrong, I thought "that" can stand for "goal" here, and therefore the sentence is:

owning and living is a goal of young adults like that (a goal) of earlier generations.

another consideration that makes clear the incorrectness of choice (a) is the usage of "like".

when you see "like a, xxxxxx" or "xxxxxx, like a", the comparison must be between "a" and the subject of clause "xxxxxx".

therefore, even if that = a goal, you still have an illogical comparison, between that (= "a goal") and owning and living...

A side question, is it true that in GMAT, "if" can only mean "conditional, e.g. If it rains, I will bring my umbrella", but not "alternative, e.g. it is decisive for the case if he has the proof", and here whether should be used, instead of if.

Thank you all.

you are correct: "if" cannot be used to mean "whether".

Thank you Ron so much! I am very touched...and more importantly, you always sound so cool.

I have been studying hard on the test, thought I was quite ready but a simulating test on Prep just destroyed my confidence...All the careful analysis skills that I thought that I have seem to be disappearing when under time pressure.

My RC is really good though, with sacrifice of time.

[tim]

glad to hear it - and Ron doesn't just sound cool, he is cool!

[niharika.jain03]

Since the comparison is between ancient civilization in singular and civilizations in plural, we cannot use the relative pronoun "those" for the latter and we have to use the word "civilizations" instead.
Hence, we can eliminate options C,D and E.

Now, we are left with options A and B.
We will chose A over B as B contains a past perfect verb which is irrelevant as the first verb used is "threaten" which is in present sense and not past tense to justify the use of past perfect tense.

[tim]

thanks. let us know if there are any further questions on this one..

[georgepaul0071987]

In (D) does "˜did’ act as an ellipsis ? Meaning does (D) read like this -
"˜flourishing at the same time as those did flourishing’ ?

If yes , since this is not grammatical , can we eliminate (D) just based on this ?

[RonPurewal]

In (D) does "˜did’ act as an ellipsis ? Meaning does (D) read like this -
"˜flourishing at the same time as those did flourishing’ ?

If yes , since this is not grammatical , can we eliminate (D) just based on this ?

gmac could decide this one either way. i don't recall seeing any official evidence in either direction.
i.e., it's possible that gmac could ...
* only allow "did" to stand for actual verbs, in which case this "did" would be incorrect (since ___ing forms aren't verbs);
or
* allow "did" to stand for any verb-based construction (including "to VERB" and "VERBing"), in which case this "did" would be fine.

the latter of these is the most common usage; for instance, to run as fast as you did today is an impressive feat would be considered correct by most, even though to run isn't actually a verb (it's an infinitive, used as a noun here). but, it's impossible to say without official evidence.

in any case, there are clearer ways to eliminate that choice. for instance, you can't use "those" alone. when "those" is used as a pronoun, as it is here, it must have some sort of modifier attached directly to it.

[vijay19839]

In a different thread, i asked the same question and i think the concln is that 'did' can replace even to-infinitive as shown in the below GMATPrep question..

post71756.html?sid=9ff7fd65b1a2bc8269d7e203f494472f#p71756

thanks
Vijay

In (D) does "˜did’ act as an ellipsis ? Meaning does (D) read like this -
"˜flourishing at the same time as those did flourishing’ ?

If yes , since this is not grammatical , can we eliminate (D) just based on this ?

gmac could decide this one either way. i don't recall seeing any official evidence in either direction.
i.e., it's possible that gmac could ...
* only allow "did" to stand for actual verbs, in which case this "did" would be incorrect (since ___ing forms aren't verbs);
or
* allow "did" to stand for any verb-based construction (including "to VERB" and "VERBing"), in which case this "did" would be fine.

the latter of these is the most common usage; for instance, to run as fast as you did today is an impressive feat would be considered correct by most, even though to run isn't actually a verb (it's an infinitive, used as a noun here). but, it's impossible to say without official evidence.

in any case, there are clearer ways to eliminate that choice. for instance, you can't use "those" alone. when "those" is used as a pronoun, as it is here, it must have some sort of modifier attached directly to it.

[jlucero]

Good find. It's definitely helpful to be able to relate one grammar issue over several different questions.

[ravimba]

nope.

if you have a parallel construction involving tensed verbs, and the tensed verb is EXACTLY THE SAME in both (or all, if there are more than 2) parts of the construction, then you may omit the verb in all but the first part.

for instance:
the rain was torrential and the wind fierce.
in this case, we're allowed to omit the second 'was', because it's identical to the 'was' in the first part.

same goes here: since the verb is exactly the same ("flourished") in both parts, you can omit it from the second part.

--

by the way, if you WERE going to include "did", preferred usage conventions actually place it BEFORE its subject: "...as did the civilizations in the nile delta..."
one would never speak this way, but it's the best way to write these sorts of constructions in formal usage.

Hi Ron,

the expaination given by you is "if you have a parallel construction involving tensed verbs, and the tensed verb is EXACTLY THE SAME in both (or all, if there are more than 2) parts of the construction, then you may omit the verb in all but the first part. "

then what about the usage of AS. AS takes clauses. in this case, the second one does not have a verb. Is it becasue, the Verb (flourished) is actually present but omitted while speaking and writing?

[RonPurewal]

then what about the usage of AS. AS takes clauses.

this sentence contains same ... as ..., which is not the same as stand-alone as.

[divineacclivity]

hmm, yeah, both of those should be correct, since there's no ambiguity in the first one.
i'll submit that to be fixed. thanks.

"The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than anyone else in the industry"

But Ron, the sentence above could mean either of the following two, NO? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

1. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than did anyone else in the industry.
2. The tycoon contributed more to the candidate's campaign than to anyone else in the industry

thanks in advance.