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

Redeem

Products

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 4:27 am
Thanked: 48 times
Followed by:7 members

Products

by vinay1983 » Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:26 pm
ln 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs,
a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but bv the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

(A) a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing

(B) a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive
but also by the fact that doctors are writing

(C) a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but
because of doctors having also written

(D) which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also
writing

(E) which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also
written

The OA is B. The explanation says "This sentence explains that a few high-cost products account for increased spending for two reasons-rising drug prices and more prescriptions for high-priced drugs. To present these two causes, the sentence employs a formula that requires parallel elements: not just because of x, but because of!,with x and y assuming the same grammatical form. One way to create this parallelism is to phrase both contributing causes as noun clauses beginning wrth thefact that.To streamline the sentence, unnecessary words and redundancies should be eliminated. One such redundancy is the repetition of meaning in explained and because of.


This parallel structure mentioned is not used in correct option, rather "not just by...but also by"

I am confused!
Last edited by vinay1983 on Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
You can, for example never foretell what any one man will do, but you can say with precision what an average number will be up to!
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
Elite Legendary Member
Posts: 10392
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Thanked: 2867 times
Followed by:511 members
GMAT Score:800

by [email protected] » Sun Sep 08, 2013 12:46 am
Hi vinay1983,

This SC certainly is quirky. It does follow parallelism rules though and one idiom rule:

First, it's worth noting that a past event (something that occurred in 2000) is considered a phenomenon that is explained by something that's happening today. The opening modifying phrase describes "a phenomenon"

1) The idiom "explained" needs to be followed by the word "by"

2) The phrase "drugs are becoming" parallels the phrase "doctors are writing"

Anything else in the explanation is not needed to solve this SC.

The only answer that fits is B

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:31 pm
Thanked: 42 times
Followed by:20 members

by sana.noor » Sun Sep 08, 2013 4:07 am
have u noticed one thing in the original sentence--> "because of" of is a preposition and require a noun. however, in original sentence it is followed by adverb "more". so thats a mistake.
drop D and E as which is refering to drugs, but prescription drugs is a phenomenon.
C---> its yukky "having also written" where is parallelism and phenomenon occurring?
B--->1) explained by...right idiom 2)using "that" properly...not just the fact...but also the fact...its a right idiom too...Choose this option.
Work hard in Silence, Let Success make the noise.

If you found my Post really helpful, then don't forget to click the Thank/follow me button. :)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 3:22 am
Thanked: 7 times
Followed by:3 members

by \'manpreet singh » Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:39 am
vinay1983 wrote:ln 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs,
a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but bv the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

(A) a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing

(B) a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive
but also by the fact that doctors are writing

(C) a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but
because of doctors having also written

(D) which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also
writing

(E) which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also
written
Here if you know the idiom "Not just ...but also" you can knock off options A and C

Since the event took place in past, "Phenomenon" should be used. D and E knocked off.
We are left with B.

---------------------------------------------------
"Good things come to those who wait... greater things come to those who get off their ass and do anything to make it happen."
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 3:22 am
Thanked: 7 times
Followed by:3 members

by \'manpreet singh » Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:41 am
vinay1983 wrote:ln 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs,
a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but bv the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

(A) a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing

(B) a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive
but also by the fact that doctors are writing

(C) a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but
because of doctors having also written

(D) which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also
writing

(E) which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also
written
Here if you know the idiom "Not just ...but also" you can knock off options A and C

Since the event took place in past, "Phenomenon" should be used. D and E knocked off.
We are left with B.

---------------------------------------------------
"Good things come to those who wait... greater things come to those who get off their ass and do anything to make it happen."
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:24 am

by jay_gmat » Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:16 am
IMO B. This is because it should follow the idiomatic rule

not just X, but also Y.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:18 pm
Thanked: 448 times
Followed by:34 members
GMAT Score:650

by theCodeToGMAT » Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:48 am
[A]: Incorrect; Idiom issue; not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact
(B): Correct
[C]: Incorrect; Awkward Sentence; meaning is impacted
[D]: Incorrect; "which" cannot be used here as we are not trying to modify the nearest possible noun
[E]: Incorrect; "which" cannot be used here as we are not trying to modify the nearest possible noun
vinay1983 wrote:ln 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs,
a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but bv the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

(A) a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing

(B) a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive
but also by the fact that doctors are writing

(C) a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but
because of doctors having also written

(D) which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also
writing

(E) which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also
written

The OA is B. The explanation says "This sentence explains that a few high-cost products account for increased spending for two reasons-rising drug prices and more prescriptions for high-priced drugs. To present these two causes, the sentence employs a formula that requires parallel elements: not just because of x, but because of!,with x and y assuming the same grammatical form. One way to create this parallelism is to phrase both contributing causes as noun clauses beginning wrth thefact that.To streamline the sentence, unnecessary words and redundancies should be eliminated. One such redundancy is the repetition of meaning in explained and because of.


This parallel structure mentioned is not used in correct option, rather "not just by...but also by"

I am confused!
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1