SC--dolphins may share certain cognitive abilities

[violetwind]

The results of two recent unrelated studies support the idea that dolphins may share certain cognitive abilities with humans and great apes; the studies indicate dolphins as capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and to grasp spontaneously the mood or intention of humans.
A.dolphins as capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and to grasp spontaneously

B.dolphins' ability to recognize themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered as a sign of self-awareness"”and of spontaneously grasping

C.dolphins to be capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and to grasp spontaneously

D. that dolphins have the ability of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered as a sign of self-awareness"”and spontaneously grasping

E. that dolphins are capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and of spontaneously grasping


Dear instructors,

This following setence is followed the right answer E.

The results of two recent unrelated studies support the idea that dolphins may share certain cognitive abilities with humans and great apes; the studies indicate that dolphins are capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and of spontaneously grasping the mood or intention of humans.

From the above sentence there are two group of parallelism. While the second preposition of the first group is omitted, that of the second group is not. Could we draw some conclusion about the usage of preposition in parallelism from this clue? That is: if omission won't cause any confusion, the second preposition in a parallelism can be omitted. In other words, unless ommission can caused some ambiguity, the second preposition in a parallelism can always be omitted.

Am I right? Please do shed some light on it, thank you !

[RonPurewal]

The results of two recent unrelated studies support the idea that dolphins may share certain cognitive abilities with humans and great apes; the studies indicate that dolphins are capable of recognizing themselves in mirrors"”an ability that is often considered a sign of self-awareness"”and of spontaneously grasping the mood or intention of humans.

From the above sentence there are two group of parallelism. While the second preposition of the first group is omitted, that of the second group is not. Could we draw some conclusion about the usage of preposition in parallelism from this clue? That is: if omission won't cause any confusion, the second preposition in a parallelism can be omitted. In other words, unless ommission can caused some ambiguity, the second preposition in a parallelism can always be omitted.

Am I right? Please do shed some light on it, thank you !

nope, incorrect.

for a diagnosis:
first, read this post
post25465.html#p25465

--

now, using the same color system:

the first parallelism is
...with
humans
and
great apes

and the second one is

...capable
of recognizing themselves...
and
of (spontaneously) grasping....

parallelism is not a handwaving, inexact criterion; if you can't parse the parallel structure in a way such that it's parallel, then it doesn't work.

[rahul.chd7]

...capable
of recognizing themselves...
and
of (spontaneously) grasping....

parallelism is not a handwaving, inexact criterion; if you can't parse the parallel structure in a way such that it's parallel, then it doesn't work.

Hi Ron,

I wanted to clarify a little doubt on this.
Can we treat the following sentence in this problem as parallel (where the modifier spontaneously is not present)?
Capable of
recognizing themselves..
and
grasping ...

I mean to ask , that is the reason that D is wrong because of the modifier spontaneously present without "of" and thus making "of" necesarry for the parallelism.
Thanks

[singh.181]

I mean to ask , that is the reason that D is wrong because of the modifier spontaneously present without "of" and thus making "of" necesarry for the parallelism.
Thanks

According to me, D is not wrong for the reason you have stated. It maintains the parallelism in the part you are talking about. But, D has other idiomatic issues in it such as "considered as" and "ability of".

[rahul.chd7]

I think Ron said that D also has parallelism issues.
I understand that other issues with D are there but i am just trying to understand the parallelism issues with D and could they be solved by removing the modifier in the option.

[RonPurewal]

I think Ron said that D also has parallelism issues.
I understand that other issues with D are there but i am just trying to understand the parallelism issues with D and could they be solved by removing the modifier in the option.

nope, no parallelism issues in (d).
the parallel structures in that choice are
recognizing ... AND (spontaneously) grasping
in this case you don't have to pay attention to the word "of" in front of "recognizing".

remember -- when it comes to what should be included in parallel structures, the only words that MUST be included are words that follow signals.
there's no signal in front of the left-hand part here, so you just take whatever is in parallel with the right-hand part.

--

more examples:
I've lived in Minnesota and Florida. --> correct
I've ilved in Minnesota and in Florida. --> also correct

here, again, there's no signal on the left-hand side. since the only signal is "and", which marks the right-hand parallel structure, you have to process the parallelism here from right to left.
in the first example, the right-hand structure is "florida" ... so you take "minnesota" as the left-hand structure (ignoring "in").
in the second example, the right-hand structure is "in florida" ... so you take "in minnesota" as the left-hand structure.

if there are signal words in front of both parallel structures, though, then you don't have this freedom -- you have to judge the parallelism from what is present after both signal words.

I've lived in both Minnesota and Florida. --> correct (minnesota is after "both", florida is after "in")
I've ilved in both Minnesota and in Florida. --> incorrect (minnesota is after "both", in florida is after "in")

[violetwind]

"remember -- when it comes to what should be included in parallel structures, the only words that MUST be included are words that follow signals.
there's no signal in front of the left-hand part here, so you just take whatever is in parallel with the right-hand part."

this last sentense is very helpful!! Thank you Ron!

[RonPurewal]

"remember -- when it comes to what should be included in parallel structures, the only words that MUST be included are words that follow signals.
there's no signal in front of the left-hand part here, so you just take whatever is in parallel with the right-hand part."

this last sentense is very helpful!! Thank you Ron!

sure.

[manhhiep2509]

Hi Ron.

OG says "In the context of this sentence, "the studies indicate" must introduce a clause".

How do we know that we need "indicate + that + clause", not "indicate + noun + preposition" as in incorrect choices?

In choice B if it does not have parallelism error, I think "indicate dolphin's ability to do xxxxx and yyyy" conveys the same meaning to "indicate that dolphin has ability to do xxxx and yyyy.

----
are "indicate X as + adj" and "Indicate X to be + adj" correct idioms?

Thank you.

[jlucero]

Hi Ron.

OG says "In the context of this sentence, "the studies indicate" must introduce a clause".

How do we know that we need "indicate + that + clause", not "indicate + noun + preposition" as in incorrect choices?

Something can indicate a thing, or it can indicate an idea. If it indicates a thing, you simply use a noun: the signs indicate bumps. If it indicates an idea, which includes a verb, you need to add the word "that" to indicate there's a new clause (noun+verb) coming up: the signs indicate that drivers should slow down. In this example, studies don't indicate dolphins. They indicate that dolphins can DO something.

In choice B if it does not have parallelism error, I think "indicate dolphin's ability to do xxxxx and yyyy" conveys the same meaning to "indicate that dolphin has ability to do xxxx and yyyy.

----
are "indicate X as + adj" and "Indicate X to be + adj" correct idioms?

Thank you.

If I understand your point, you are correct. It would be ok to say "dolphins have the ability TO RECOGNIZE and TO GRASP" or "dolphins are capable OF RECOGNIZING and OF GRASPING". It's not ok to mix them together because it breaks parallelism.

[Harish Kumar]

I think Ron said that D also has parallelism issues.
I understand that other issues with D are there but i am just trying to understand the parallelism issues with D and could they be solved by removing the modifier in the option.

nope, no parallelism issues in (d).
the parallel structures in that choice are
recognizing ... AND (spontaneously) grasping
in this case you don't have to pay attention to the word "of" in front of "recognizing".

remember -- when it comes to what should be included in parallel structures, the only words that MUST be included are words that follow signals.
there's no signal in front of the left-hand part here, so you just take whatever is in parallel with the right-hand part.

--

more examples:
I've lived in Minnesota and Florida. --> correct
I've ilved in Minnesota and in Florida. --> also correct

here, again, there's no signal on the left-hand side. since the only signal is "and", which marks the right-hand parallel structure, you have to process the parallelism here from right to left.
in the first example, the right-hand structure is "florida" ... so you take "minnesota" as the left-hand structure (ignoring "in").
in the second example, the right-hand structure is "in florida" ... so you take "in minnesota" as the left-hand structure.

if there are signal words in front of both parallel structures, though, then you don't have this freedom -- you have to judge the parallelism from what is present after both signal words.

I've lived in both Minnesota and Florida. --> correct (minnesota is after "both", florida is after "in")
I've ilved in both Minnesota and in Florida. --> incorrect (minnesota is after "both", in florida is after "in")

Regarding your statement, that there are no parallelism issues in D,the explanations in the official guide do mention there are parallelism issues between the two entities "of recognizing" and "spontaneously grasping" and reject choice D for the same reason, along with the wordiness of "have the ability of".

[RonPurewal]

You can leave "of" out of the parallel structure (so that there are two __ing forms in parallel).

[RonPurewal]

Since this problem is in the OG, we'll need to see a screen shot of the problem in GMAT PREP before we can continue discussing it.

If anyone has a screen shot but doesn't know how to upload images directly"”Just post the image to an image-hosting website, and then paste the link here.

Thank you.