Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(A) Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(B) Reared apart from each other, striking similarities between identical twins that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior were shown in a recent United States study.
(C) A recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins reared apart from each other that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(D) According to a recent United States study, identical twins reared apart from each other showed striking similarities, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(E) According to a recent United States study, identical twins showed striking similarities reared apart from each other, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Reared apart from each other
-
madhur_ahuja
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
- Thanked: 17 times
-
brick2009
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:59 pm
- Thanked: 8 times
Answer is D:
The original sentence: reared apart---What/who? not the US study..so A is X
B--> Illogical
C--> The problem with C is its a Run-on sentence.. continuous and hard to understand
D & E:
Study (was related to) --> Identical twins --> (and the next logical part of the sentence should be related to the twins.).--> who were reared apart E violates this norm
PS: everyones though process is different..
..and this is how i deciphered.. it
The original sentence: reared apart---What/who? not the US study..so A is X
B--> Illogical
C--> The problem with C is its a Run-on sentence.. continuous and hard to understand
D & E:
Study (was related to) --> Identical twins --> (and the next logical part of the sentence should be related to the twins.).--> who were reared apart E violates this norm
PS: everyones though process is different..
..and this is how i deciphered.. it-
hamxa
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:17 am
- Location: lahore, pakistan
A)-Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study ....(Misplaced mod.)
B)-same reason as above
C)-Use of 'that' is ambiguous.
D)-Right answer !
E)-striking similarities reared apart from each other. Suggesting that striking similarities were reared apart from each other.
B)-same reason as above
C)-Use of 'that' is ambiguous.
D)-Right answer !
E)-striking similarities reared apart from each other. Suggesting that striking similarities were reared apart from each other.
-
girish3131
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:18 am
- Thanked: 2 times
-
ansumania
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:18 pm
- Thanked: 4 times
are 'reared' and 'including' used parallely? Not sure...pl. suggest.madhur_ahuja wrote: Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(A) Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(B) Reared apart from each other, striking similarities between identical twins that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior were shown in a recent United States study.
(C) A recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins reared apart from each other that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(D) According to a recent United States study, identical twins reared apart from each other showed striking similarities, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(E) According to a recent United States study, identical twins showed striking similarities reared apart from each other, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
they are not.ansumania wrote:are 'reared' and 'including' used parallely? Not sure...pl. suggest.madhur_ahuja wrote: Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(A) Reared apart from each other, a recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(B) Reared apart from each other, striking similarities between identical twins that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior were shown in a recent United States study.
(C) A recent United States study showed striking similarities in identical twins reared apart from each other that include many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(D) According to a recent United States study, identical twins reared apart from each other showed striking similarities, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
(E) According to a recent United States study, identical twins showed striking similarities reared apart from each other, including many idiosyncrasies of behavior.
remember that the fundamental foundation of parallelism is parallel CONTEXT -- parallelism is not necessary, or even relevant, unless the two words/constructions are actually describing THE SAME KIND OF THING/SITUATION.
in this problem, "reared" is describing the twins themselves, while "including" modifies the striking similarities.
therefore, since these modifiers are not used in parallel contexts, they don't need to be parallel. (however, they don't need to be NONparallel, either.)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
by the way, this is a poorly written question -- what's the source?
in choice (d), which is presumably intended to be the correct answer, the word "showed" should actually be "show" (i.e., present tense), since this study is showing things that are presented as universal generalities. when universal generalities are presented, they should be presented in the present tense, even if the studies that discovered them are in the past.
for instance:
a 17th-century study showed that human blood circulates through the veins and arteries.
even though the study was in the 17th century, we must still use "circulates" in the present tense, since this is a generality that still applies to humans today. (if we wrote "circulated", then we would be wrongly implying that human blood doesn't work this way anymore.)
the sloppy writing of the correct answer suggests that the twins showed these generalities at the time of the study (hence the past tense), but don't anymore.
in choice (d), which is presumably intended to be the correct answer, the word "showed" should actually be "show" (i.e., present tense), since this study is showing things that are presented as universal generalities. when universal generalities are presented, they should be presented in the present tense, even if the studies that discovered them are in the past.
for instance:
a 17th-century study showed that human blood circulates through the veins and arteries.
even though the study was in the 17th century, we must still use "circulates" in the present tense, since this is a generality that still applies to humans today. (if we wrote "circulated", then we would be wrongly implying that human blood doesn't work this way anymore.)
the sloppy writing of the correct answer suggests that the twins showed these generalities at the time of the study (hence the past tense), but don't anymore.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
tomada
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 406
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:36 am
- Location: Syracuse, NY
- Thanked: 23 times
- Followed by:4 members
- GMAT Score:740
lunarpower wrote:by the way, this is a poorly written question -- what's the source?
in choice (d), which is presumably intended to be the correct answer, the word "showed" should actually be "show" (i.e., present tense), since this study is showing things that are presented as universal generalities. when universal generalities are presented, they should be presented in the present tense, even if the studies that discovered them are in the past.
for instance:
a 17th-century study showed that human blood circulates through the veins and arteries.
even though the study was in the 17th century, we must still use "circulates" in the present tense, since this is a generality that still applies to humans today. (if we wrote "circulated", then we would be wrongly implying that human blood doesn't work this way anymore.)
the sloppy writing of the correct answer suggests that the twins showed these generalities at the time of the study (hence the past tense), but don't anymore.
Hypothetically, if the words "According to" were replaced with the individual word "In", could "showed" be correct, since the sentence would be referring to a specific timeframe (the recent study)?
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
absolutely yes. nice.tomada wrote:Hypothetically, if the words "According to" were replaced with the individual word "In", could "showed" be correct, since the sentence would be referring to a specific timeframe (the recent study)?
if you say "according to", then the following discussion should represent the point or conclusion of the study, which should ideally be a general principle. if this general principle still applies, then it should be in the present tense.
however, yes, if you have "IN the study/studies", then you're talking about what actually happened in the study/studies. since the studies are not still ongoing, the past tense would be most appropriate in that case.
nicely done.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
