SC : Despite the growing number

[gauravtyagigmat]

In this question All the answer choices used just as but so was missing "just as ....so"
1. Please let me know why so was not there?
2. can we do it for other idoms?
3. what understanding am i lacking that i need to understand? ?

[RonPurewal]

As you mentioned yourself, "so" was not in any of the choices, making this idea a non-issue.

There are several of these:
If x, then y (you can also say just "If x, y", omitting "then")
both x and y (you can also say just "x and y", omitting "both")
either x or y (you can also say just "x or y", omitting "either")

In most examples I can think of, the second word -- the one that's not technically necessary -- is added either for clarity or for emphasis.
The "clarity" issue usually arises in longer sentences. (If the "x" and the "y" are huge, then the sentence is practically unreadable without both signal words.)
"Emphasis" is a stylistic issue, and as such is of no concern to GMAT test takers.

Have you ever seen a problem where this kind of thing was actually split between answer choices?

[gauravtyagigmat]

As you mentioned yourself, "so" was not in any of the choices, making this idea a non-issue.

There are several of these:
If x, then y (you can also say just "If x, y", omitting "then")
both x and y (you can also say just "x and y", omitting "both")
either x or y (you can also say just "x or y", omitting "either")

In most examples I can think of, the second word -- the one that's not technically necessary -- is added either for clarity or for emphasis.
The "clarity" issue usually arises in longer sentences. (If the "x" and the "y" are huge, then the sentence is practically unreadable without both signal words.)
"Emphasis" is a stylistic issue, and as such is of no concern to GMAT test takers.

Have you ever seen a problem where this kind of thing was actually split between answer choices?

No I have not seen a sentence with this kind of split , but I have seen few question's explations of OG, which says "so" must be followed by "that" incorrect idiom.

how do I develop a sense that now there is ambiguity and it is difficult to read, because in most of the questions anybody can infere what sentence under consideration is trying to say

[RonPurewal]

how do I develop a sense that now there is ambiguity and it is difficult to read, because in most of the questions anybody can infere what sentence under consideration is trying to say

^^ I don't understand this question.

[boncourage]

1. you can't write "of + NOUN + VERBing" if the action of VERBing is the focus of the preposition.
yes.
this is mostly a problem for native english speakers, because that kind of usage is ubiquitous in spoken english. for non-native speakers, it's just a normal modifier rule that doesn't require any un-learning of speech habits.

Hi Ron, Greetings! I have 2 questions about the "despite XX" part:
A. Despite growing number of people who purchase plane tickets online...
C. Despite growing number of people purchasing plane tickets online
E. Despite the fact that the number of people who purchase plane tickets online are growing,

1. In A and C, my understanding is that People + purchasing and People who purchase have the same function, i.e. both of them are restrictive and narrow down the "category" of people. Is this logic right?

2. In A, C, and E, are all the "despite XXX" sound in terms of grammar? Then it is the mistakes in latter part of the sentence that rule out C and E? What do you think?

Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

1. In A and C, my understanding is that People + purchasing and People who purchase have the same function, i.e. both of them are restrictive and narrow down the "category" of people. Is this logic right?

* I don't know what "restrictive" means. (From the way the word looks, I'd guess that it means "narrows down the possibilities" -- but you wrote "it's restrictive AND narrows the possibilities", suggesting that those are two different things. So, I don't know what it means.)

* "People __ing" and "people who __" aren't exactly the same.
The "__ing" version means that something is happening during the timeframe of the sentence, but does not imply that it's permanent or habitual.
The "who __" version, on the other hand, implies permanence or habitual action.
E.g.,
People talking about politics = people who are talking about politics at this very moment (or whenever the action of the sentence occurs), even if those people have never talked about politics at any other point in their lives.
People who talk about politics = people who regularly/habitually talk about politics.

In this sentence, the __ing makes more sense, because the whole point is that more people are starting to buy online -- i.e., NOT longstanding/habitual actions.

[RonPurewal]

2. In A, C, and E, are all the "despite XXX" sound in terms of grammar? Then it is the mistakes in latter part of the sentence that rule out C and E? What do you think?

Thank you!

"The number ... are growing" rules out E.
Should be "the number is growing".

[danli311]

1. In A and C, my understanding is that People + purchasing and People who purchase have the same function, i.e. both of them are restrictive and narrow down the "category" of people. Is this logic right?

* I don't know what "restrictive" means. (From the way the word looks, I'd guess that it means "narrows down the possibilities" -- but you wrote "it's restrictive AND narrows the possibilities", suggesting that those are two different things. So, I don't know what it means.)

* "People __ing" and "people who __" aren't exactly the same.
The "__ing" version means that something is happening during the timeframe of the sentence, but does not imply that it's permanent or habitual.
The "who __" version, on the other hand, implies permanence or habitual action.
E.g.,
People talking about politics = people who are talking about politics at this very moment (or whenever the action of the sentence occurs), even if those people have never talked about politics at any other point in their lives.
People who talk about politics = people who regularly/habitually talk about politics.

In this sentence, the __ing makes more sense, because the whole point is that more people are starting to buy online -- i.e., NOT longstanding/habitual actions.

Hello Ron,

I am not quite sure about what you meant in "because the whole point is that more people are starting to buy online -- i.e., NOT longstanding/habitual actions."

In the correct answer A, it uses people who purchase plane ticket online, implying habitual situations, is this less preferred?

And could you have a look at the following summary points I have made and please correct me if I am wrong.

1. When modifying content of a law, ING form is preferred.
e.g. .... compliance with law requring that turtle net on .....(this is from OG)

2. When the modifier, for example, purchasing or people who purchase (as in this question) , has a different time framework from the main clause, a clause is preferred.
For example,
I see the man cleaning windows yesterday. (incorrect)
I see the man who cleaned windows yesterday. (correct)

3. Both ING form and clause modifiers would be fine if the action within the modifier actally happens at the same time framework. And, ING form is slightly better as it is neater?

Thanks in advance!

[RonPurewal]

danli311, you have "preferred" in three different questions in your post. That's not a good thing.

"Preferred" is not a thing on the GMAT.
English (like every other language in the world) does have a huge number of "preferences", but those are style issues.
The GMAT doesn't test style -- and never will, because a stylistic test would be basically impossible for non-native English speakers.

As far as the GMAT is concerned, any given construction will be either (a) legitimate, or (b) not legitimate.
If you have to choose between two (or more) legitimate constructions, then it's just going to be a matter of context.

I am not quite sure about what you meant in "because the whole point is that more people are starting to buy online -- i.e., NOT longstanding/habitual actions."

In the correct answer A, it uses people who purchase plane ticket online, implying habitual situations, is this less preferred?

No such thing as "less preferred". Just sense or nonsense.

In this sentence, it makes no sense to speak of habitual actions, because the number is increasing. The people who are just beginning to buy tickets online can't logically be described as "people who buy xxxxx".
On the other hand, it's perfectly logical that the number of people buying xxxx -- i.e., right now, at present -- is increasing.

[RonPurewal]

1. When modifying content of a law, ING form is preferred.
e.g. .... compliance with law requring that turtle net on .....(this is from OG)

In general, if you come up with anything that's this absurdly specific, it's wrong. Language is not that specialized.

You can make this decision the same way you'd make it for any other subject material. The law does not affect modifiers and verb forms.

E.g.,
Most Americans would not vote for a law that restricts free speech. (works)
*Most Americans would not vote for a law restricting free speech. (doesn't make sense)
Here, we're talking about a law that isn't yet in effect -- people are still voting for or against it. So, "restricting" doesn't work here: it implies that the law already restricts free speech while the voters are considering it.

Most sentences discussing laws will, of course, describe situations in which the law actually applies. So, in most cases, the "ing" should make sense. But it's going to be impossible to make "rules" like this. Just think about context!

[RonPurewal]

2. When the modifier, for example, purchasing or people who purchase (as in this question) , has a different time framework from the main clause, a clause is preferred.
For example,
I see the man cleaning windows yesterday. (incorrect)
I see the man who cleaned windows yesterday. (correct)

Again, "preferred" is not a thing.

The first sentence is wrong (not just "not preferred"), because "cleaning" is not describing something in the same time frame as "I see".

3. Both ING form and clause modifiers would be fine if the action within the modifier actally happens at the same time framework. And, ING form is slightly better as it is neater?

What is a "clause modifier"?

I know very, very few grammar terms, so you should always accompany stuff like this with examples. Thanks.

[danli311]

Again, "preferred" is not a thing.

Yeah, that's a fatal mistake. No "preferred" in GMAT, got it!

3. Both ING form and clause modifiers would be fine if the action within the modifier actally happens at the same time framework. And, ING form is slightly better as it is neater?

What is a "clause modifier"?

I know very, very few grammar terms, so you should always accompany stuff like this with examples. Thanks.[/quote]

Please excuse me for not making myself clear.What I wanted to ask is, for example, is there a difference in meaning in the two sentences below?

1. The Act that inhibits smoking in public areas has a huge impact on our society.
2. The Act inhibiting smoking in public areas has a huge impact on our society.

Thank you ! !!

[RonPurewal]

In that context, both versions are fine.

[Nz]

Hello Instructors,
I've read the entire thread but I'm not clear on why D is wrong. I understand its wrong because of the redundant use of prefer and compared to. But I don't understand why or how "...of people purchasing" is incorrect. Can someone please explain the "Prep+Noun+VerbING" usage.

Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

Hello Instructors,
I've read the entire thread but I'm not clear on why D is wrong. I understand its wrong because of the redundant use of prefer and compared to. But I don't understand why or how "...of people purchasing" is incorrect. Can someone please explain the "Prep+Noun+VerbING" usage.

Thank you!

Read here:
post26678.html#p26678