BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem
TTP OnDemand GMAT Video Course
Featured Course

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.

  • 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
  • 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
  • 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
  • 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
  • 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
  • TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
  • 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
  • OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
  • Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
  • MBA Admissions Consulting now available
  • 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
  • 200,000+ students served
  • 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★ 5.0 (559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start then $127/mo
Start Free 5-Day Trial Read 559 Reviews →

good one

Expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:20 pmFollowed by: 4 members
Thanked: 74 times

by uwhusky » Tue Oct 19, 2010 12:50 pm
https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/not ... -t276.html

According to Stacy, we probably won't see another question that breaks the idiom.
Yep.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:36 am
Thanked: 6 times

by kapur.arnav » Tue Oct 19, 2010 12:54 pm
kapur.arnav wrote:
uwhusky wrote:Read through the post, it does not violate the idiom "not only...but also..." It's an entirely different construction.
Ya... that question follows a different rule...

You may note the following:

Not only x... but also y.
&
not only x... but y - both are correct.....

In the following q but also at is not present in the non underlined part... hence you should just concentrate on not only x... but y

The skill and the precision of the Anasazi, ancient inhabitants of the Southwest, in measuring the movements of the Sun a ... t only at Chaco Canyon but at a number of other sites

(A) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced not only at - is evidenced is wrong... we are measuring 2 things..
(B) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon are evidenced not only at - correct
(C) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced at not only - lacks parallelism
(D) to measure the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced at not only - lacks parallelism
(E) to measure the movements of the Sun and Moon are evidenced not only at - to measure is wrong

Hope it helps... I'm searching for that not only x... but y construction for you... will post it for sure if im able to locate it...
Aha... found it.. here it goes... https://www.beatthegmat.com/idiom-not-on ... t9913.html..
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:20 pmFollowed by: 4 members
Thanked: 74 times

by uwhusky » Tue Oct 19, 2010 12:59 pm
More discussion on this matter: https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/by- ... t1459.html

Good stuff btw, didn't think I was able to dig this far on what I thought was a simple idiom.
Yep.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:36 am
Thanked: 6 times

by kapur.arnav » Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:18 pm
uwhusky wrote:More discussion on this matter: https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/by- ... t1459.html

Good stuff btw, didn't think I was able to dig this far on what I thought was a simple idiom.
Let me give you the best in this series... here it goes.. btw after this im not sure what is correct... guys can someone correctly and foronce and for all summarize this rule... this can be a pain on the day for sure...

As a result of surging economic indicators, most analysts upgraded thre company's stock to a strong "buy" ignoring the advice of the head of a watchdog organization who warned that the company's product would prove not only dangerous but ineffective in the long run.

A. who warned that the company's product would prove not only dangerous but

B. warning that the company's product would prove not only dangerous and also

C. Warning that the company's product would prove itself to be both dangerous and

D who warned that the company's product would prove to be both dangerous and

E. who was warning that the company's product would prove not only dangerous but

https://www.beatthegmat.com/economic-ind ... tml#165802
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:20 pmFollowed by: 4 members
Thanked: 74 times

by uwhusky » Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:25 pm
Ron summarized it perfectly, and I don't think we should complicate it further unless a specific GMAT example warrants such effort.

Plus the question you just cited is not an OG question.
Yep.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:03 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by vishalj » Tue Oct 19, 2010 8:19 pm
Completely agree with uwhusky. Strictly follow your idioms. And trust your source. Period.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:36 am
Thanked: 6 times

by kapur.arnav » Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:59 pm
uwhusky wrote:Ron summarized it perfectly, and I don't think we should complicate it further unless a specific GMAT example warrants such effort.

Plus the question you just cited is not an OG question.
Correct... I just happened to overread Ron's Post.... He has summarized it perfectly!!!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:54 am
Thanked: 6 times

by pzazz12 » Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:04 am
kapur.arnav wrote:
uwhusky wrote:Read through the post, it does not violate the idiom "not only...but also..." It's an entirely different construction.
Ya... that question follows a different rule...

You may note the following:

Not only x... but also y.
&
not only x... but y - both are correct.....

In the following q but also at is not present in the non underlined part... hence you should just concentrate on not only x... but y

The skill and the precision of the Anasazi, ancient inhabitants of the Southwest, in measuring the movements of the Sun a ... t only at Chaco Canyon but at a number of other sites

(A) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced not only at - is evidenced is wrong... we are measuring 2 things..
(B) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon are evidenced not only at - correct
(C) in measuring the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced at not only - lacks parallelism
(D) to measure the movements of the Sun and Moon is evidenced at not only - lacks parallelism
(E) to measure the movements of the Sun and Moon are evidenced not only at - to measure is wrong

Hope it helps... I'm searching for that not only x... but y construction for you... will post it for sure if im able to locate it...
thanks......for your brief explanation........
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Locked