SC

[viveksunder.vs]

Sulfur dioxide, a major contributor to acid rain, is an especially serious pollutant because it diminishes the respiratory system’s ability to deal with all other pollutants.
A. an especially serious pollutant because it diminishes the respiratory system’s ability to deal
B. an especially serious pollutant because of diminishing the respiratory system’s capability of dealing
C. an especially serious pollutant because it diminishes the capability of the respiratory system in dealing
D. a specially serious pollutant because it diminishes the capability of the respiratory system to deal
E. a specially serious pollutant because of diminishing the respiratory system’s ability to deal

[raghava_bharadwaj]

Whats the OA?

I would have said A.
to deal with is better than dealing with.
especially is better. Though its more british english than American english

[RonPurewal]

hi -

normally you're supposed to, at a minimum, ask some sort of question about the problem. you're not supposed to just post it with no commentary, as if it had accidentally fallen out of a grocery bag.

this problem is a pure test of word choice / idiomatic expression. that's a situation that i don't see often on official problems; it's almost as though the gmat is taking cheap potshots at the (great many) non-native speakers of english who take the test.

* "specially", which means "in a special way", is incorrect here. (example of correct use: "the specially crafted exclusive edition of this car costs more than the standard edition") you want "especially", which means "in particular" or "more so than all the others". therefore D and E are gone.

* "capability of ____ing" and "capability in ____ing" are unidiomatic, so B and C are gone.

those two are enough, but note also:
* "because of ____ing", where ____ing is a noun, is unidiomatic, so B and E are gone.
NOTE: be careful with this elimination. if ____ing is an adjective, not a participle, then "because of ____ing NOUN" is a perfectly acceptable structure, as in "because of diminishing returns, i don't get as much interest from my bank account anymore".

[raghava_bharadwaj]

cool ! Thanks for a professional explanation!

[JonathanSchneider]

: )

[nash.avi]

What is the correct idiomatic usage of the word "capable"/"capability"?


Thanks in advance.

[StaceyKoprince]

someone/something is capable OF something (noun)
She is capable of running swiftly.

someone/something has the capability TO do (verb) something
She has the capability to run swiftly.

not as common: someone/something has the capability of someone or something else (noun)
She has the capability of a gazelle.

[rajateee]

In A:
IT might refer to acid rain?
am I correct?

[RonPurewal]

In A:
IT might refer to acid rain?
am I correct?

you're falling into the habit of questioning the correct answers to official answers. don't do this; it's not productive.
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... -the-gmat/

as noted a few other times on this forum - most noticeably in the GMATPrep verbal folder, but in a couple places in the other verbal folders - pronoun ambiguity is not an absolute rule. in other words, the test will clearly tolerate a certain degree of pronoun ambiguity.

in general, we've found:
the gmat will tolerate pronoun ambiguity when both of the following are satisfied:
1. the intended referent makes much more sense than do the other possible referents,
and
2. the intended referent is PARALLEL TO THE PRONOUN, and the other possible referents are NOT parallel to the pronoun.

in this case, both are satisfied.
(1) "sulfur dioxide" makes sense; "acid rain" doesn't.
(2) "sulfur dioxide" is a SUBJECT. "it" is a SUBJECT. these are parallel. ("acid rain" is the object of a preposition.)

[tgt.ivyleague]

Dear Ron,

In this sentence, even though "a major contributor to acid rain" is a middleman, can we still use it for checking parallelism ??

I mean, is the fact that "to acid rain" is parallel to "to deal" purely coincidental or can we use it to eliminate choices B and C??

Coz, if that be so, the correct choice become very easy to determine since D & E can be easily ruled out for usage of "specially" !

Thanks in Advance ......

Sam

[mschwrtz]

Tempting Sam, but no.

The "to" in "to acid rain" is a preposition (notice that "rain" is used here as a noun).

The "to" in "to deal" begins an infinitive (notice that "deal" is used here as a verb).

No parallel whatsoever.

[alvin8139]

I don't question the official answer, but I try to understand better.

I understand only alive stuff can use the form " 's". Why is it allowed to have "respiratory system’s" in OA, while system is not something alive. This really bothers me, since normally I eliminate choices by this rule.

[mschwrtz]

I understand only alive stuff can use the form " 's". Why is it allowed to have "respiratory system’s" in OA, while system is not something alive. This really bothers me, since normally I eliminate choices by this rule.

There is no such rule. I've heard/read that there is, but all you have to do is read stuff in English to see that expert writers observe no such rule. Perhaps those who promulgate this alleged rule have the word its in mind. The possessive its doesn't have an apostrophe, though the contraction it's (for it is) does. But possessive pronouns in general don't have apostrophes, his, hers, theirs, ours, yours, whose.

You say that you have used this alleged rule to eliminate answers. Can you give examples?

[suhpra]

I understand only alive stuff can use the form " 's". Why is it allowed to have "respiratory system’s" in OA, while system is not something alive. This really bothers me, since normally I eliminate choices by this rule.

There is no such rule. I've heard/read that there is, but all you have to do is read stuff in English to see that expert writers observe no such rule. Perhaps those who promulgate this alleged rule have the word its in mind. The possessive its doesn't have an apostrophe, though the contraction it's (for it is) does. But possessive pronouns in general don't have apostrophes, his, hers, theirs, ours, yours, whose.

You say that you have used this alleged rule to eliminate answers. Can you give examples?

I'm afraid a lot of us non-native speakers do not understand when to use 's as per Ron's post here : the-three-women-liberal-activists-who-strongly-t5734.html

I am attempting to apply the same logic on possessives without much luck.

For example, the GMAT prep problem:

The three women, liberal activists who strongly support legislation in favor of civil rights and environmental protection, have consistently received labor's unqualifying support.

Labor's unqualifying support is deemed wrong because labor's is wrong. Can some one please clarify the difference between this usage and the usage with respiratory system's. Again I do not contest the answer in this thread; I just wish to understand how the possessives work and whether they follow any rule at all.

[RonPurewal]

I understand only alive stuff can use the form " 's". Why is it allowed to have "respiratory system’s" in OA, while system is not something alive. This really bothers me, since normally I eliminate choices by this rule.

There is no such rule. I've heard/read that there is, but all you have to do is read stuff in English to see that expert writers observe no such rule. Perhaps those who promulgate this alleged rule have the word its in mind. The possessive its doesn't have an apostrophe, though the contraction it's (for it is) does. But possessive pronouns in general don't have apostrophes, his, hers, theirs, ours, yours, whose.

You say that you have used this alleged rule to eliminate answers. Can you give examples?

I'm afraid a lot of us non-native speakers do not understand when to use 's as per Ron's post here : the-three-women-liberal-activists-who-strongly-t5734.html

I am attempting to apply the same logic on possessives without much luck.

For example, the GMAT prep problem:

The three women, liberal activists who strongly support legislation in favor of civil rights and environmental protection, have consistently received labor's unqualifying support.

Labor's unqualifying support is deemed wrong because labor's is wrong. Can some one please clarify the difference between this usage and the usage with respiratory system's. Again I do not contest the answer in this thread; I just wish to understand how the possessives work and whether they follow any rule at all.

the poster is probably referring to this thread:
post21475.html#p21475

note, though, the following text from that post:

the REAL issue, though, is "unqualifying" -- this is incorrect.
"unqualifying" means "not meeting some sort of standard for qualification".
the intended meaning here is "unqualified", which means "without any sort of restriction or reservation".

that's the real problem here.
note that they will NEVER include an answer that is only incorrect because it's "awkward".
they may include such options in answer choices, mostly to give a compensatory advantage to people with a very subtle understanding of the English language. (by "compensatory" i mean that this sort of linguistic skill would help balance the scales for verbally talented individuals, given that there is an entire quantitative section on this exam.) however, you will never have to make such distinctions to solve a problem.