B is right answer
I have a different query here
The way we do for ,example from OG,q87
In an effort to reduce their inventories , italian vintners have cut prices; their wines
are priced to sell and they do
Author writes that u must assume the place after DO <SELL> (ofcourse it can't be selling / sold)
Similarly here
The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's (TRACT)
so here we compare TRACTS with TRACT -- therfore illogical
Agreed, the Vocal tracts cant be w/o language !
Now, correct answer is
Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape's (TRACT) --Bingo
Matches perfectly,same sense
Is my reasoning correct, aside from the reasoning stated upthread !??
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Neanderthals had a vocal tract
Ok this is a complete guess on my part, but I'll give it a shot.sg7007 wrote:I have the same question.bluementor wrote:I understand that to refer to a singular, you can't use 'those'...
but my question here is why is vocal tract singular in the first place? Why is it not plural as follows:
Neanderthals had vocal tracts....
by having plural 'vocal tracts', we are decribing the inherent nature of the vocal tracts (of the Neanderthals) in general, which I think what the passage is all about.
From the OA, Neanderthals had a vocal tract... seems to refer to a single vocal tract 'shared' by all Neanderthals which I find illogical.
Can someone please clearify this. Thanks.
BlueMentor
If vocal tracts were plural, the sentence could hypothetically be read as describing a Neanderthal to have multiple vocal tracts (just as cows have 4 stomachs). It could also be read as you imply; collectively all Neanderthals and all of their vocal tracts. I'm just saying the possibility of 1 Neanderthal having multiple vocal tracts exists with that construction. If vocal tract is singular, it logically implicates the one body part, the vocal tract, of the group Neanderthals. It cannot be reasonably concluded that Neanderthals as a group shared one vocal tract. It just makes the reference and meaning even clearer to apply the singular body part to the plural group. Answer B correctly compares singular to singular and the construction of the sentence precludes the possible interpretation of a single Neanderthal having multiple vocal tracts (not that it's very reasonable, but that's not the point)
I hope that it's clearer, even though it's kind of a stretch...
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
this looks like solid reasoning. nicely done.mmslf75 wrote:B is right answer
I have a different query here
The way we do for ,example from OG,q87
In an effort to reduce their inventories , italian vintners have cut prices; their wines
are priced to sell and they do
Author writes that u must assume the place after DO <SELL> (ofcourse it can't be selling / sold)
Similarly here
The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's (TRACT)
so here we compare TRACTS with TRACT -- therfore illogical
Agreed, the Vocal tracts cant be w/o language !
Now, correct answer is
Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape's (TRACT) --Bingo
Matches perfectly,same sense
Is my reasoning correct, aside from the reasoning stated upthread !??
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
(emphasis mine)cameronwu wrote:Ok this is a complete guess on my part, but I'll give it a shot.
If vocal tracts were plural, the sentence could hypothetically be read as describing a Neanderthal to have multiple vocal tracts (just as cows have 4 stomachs). It could also be read as you imply; collectively all Neanderthals and all of their vocal tracts. I'm just saying the possibility of 1 Neanderthal having multiple vocal tracts exists with that construction. If vocal tract is singular, it logically implicates the one body part, the vocal tract, of the group Neanderthals. It cannot be reasonably concluded that Neanderthals as a group shared one vocal tract. It just makes the reference and meaning even clearer to apply the singular body part to the plural group. Answer B correctly compares singular to singular and the construction of the sentence precludes the possible interpretation of a single Neanderthal having multiple vocal tracts (not that it's very reasonable, but that's not the point)
I hope that it's clearer, even though it's kind of a stretch...
this is actually a decent analysis. still, it's not as definite as you're making it out to be; you might use the exact same word in a singular context in one sentence, but in a plural context in another.
for instance:
families in desert tribes lived in single-family homes, unlike families in northwestern tribes, who lived in longhouses with their extended families.
here it's not logical to say "a single-family home". but you could definitely say
like suburban families of today, families in ancient desert tribes normally owned a single-family home.
(this sentence would probably also make sense if the noun were in the plural.)
i've boldfaced the text from your response above that is most appropriate. basically, it's all about context; this is not really a grammatical issue. if you're talking about some sort of item that is distributed one per person, or one per family, or one per whatever else, then, depending on context, either the singular or the plural could be more appropriate.
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
-
kapur.arnav
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:36 am
- Thanked: 6 times
I'm trying to do this by giving 2 examples.....sg7007 wrote:I have the same question.bluementor wrote:I understand that to refer to a singular, you can't use 'those'...
but my question here is why is vocal tract singular in the first place? Why is it not plural as follows:
Neanderthals had vocal tracts....
by having plural 'vocal tracts', we are decribing the inherent nature of the vocal tracts (of the Neanderthals) in general, which I think what the passage is all about.
From the OA, Neanderthals had a vocal tract... seems to refer to a single vocal tract 'shared' by all Neanderthals which I find illogical.
Can someone please clearify this. Thanks.
BlueMentor
Humans have an ear using which they listen... - this does not mean that all humans are using one ear to hear....
Singers have a vocal tract using which they sing... - this does not mean that all singers are using a single vocal tract...
-
maoriba
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:38 pm
- Location: hong kong
- Thanked: 2 times
- GMAT Score:490
GOOD ONE, THE SUBJ. OF THE COMPARISON ARE CLEARLY EXPRESSED.ektamatta wrote:22. Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so were probably without language, a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species.
(A) Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes (A VOCAL TRACT VS. VOCAL TRACTS)
(B) Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape's NO, NEANDHERTALS AND APES SHOULD STAY IN SAME PLURAL
(C) The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's SAME AS ABOVE
(D) The Neanderthal's vocal tracts resembled the apes' TOO SHORT
(E) The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals resembled those of the apes
riba made
-
anirudhbhalotia
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:18 pm
- Location: Mumbai, India
- Thanked: 5 times
- Followed by:4 members
Interesting problem.
IMO -
C, D, E - It seems to suggest that "vocal tracts" are the subject and it was without language. Whereas I think Neanderthals is the subject without language and not "vocal tracts".
A - Again the use "that" seems to make "vocal tracts" the subject.
Hence B is the answer.
But keen to hear the actual answer and explanation.
IMO -
C, D, E - It seems to suggest that "vocal tracts" are the subject and it was without language. Whereas I think Neanderthals is the subject without language and not "vocal tracts".
A - Again the use "that" seems to make "vocal tracts" the subject.
Hence B is the answer.
But keen to hear the actual answer and explanation.
-
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
In the context of the statement, I viewed the term "vocal tract" merely as a physical characteristic of all Neanderthals, so I didn't see a problem with the relationship between the plural "Neanderthals" and the singular "vocal tract". I think it'd be different if the statement mentioned physical objects, like clubs or dwellings, such as "Neanderthals lived in homes (plural) made from...." or "Neanderthals used primitive tools to..." However, I think it'd be ok to say "Neanderthals used a primitive tool called a make up a name for a tool to construct dwellings", while we'd understand that the collective Neanderthal nation did not all share this one particular object.
I'm really old, but I'll never be too old to become more educated.
-
maddy2u
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:45 am
- Thanked: 2 times
- GMAT Score:710
ektamatta wrote:22. Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes and so were probably without language, a shortcoming that may explain why they were supplanted by our own species.
(A) Neanderthals had a vocal tract that resembled those of the apes --> Vocal Tract - Singular those - plural
(B) Neanderthals had a vocal tract resembling an ape's --> No Parallelism
(C) The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's --> No Parallelism
(D) The Neanderthal's vocal tracts resembled the apes' --> No Parallelism
(E) The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals resembled those of the apes --> Correct
-
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
Let's go a few words beyond the end of the underlined portion.
(E), for instance: "The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals...and so were probably without language...."
This says that the vocal tracts [of the Neanderthals] were probably without language, not the Neanderthals themselves.
What makes more sense, that vocal tracts were probably without language, or that Neanderthals were probably without language?
(E), for instance: "The vocal tracts of the Neanderthals...and so were probably without language...."
This says that the vocal tracts [of the Neanderthals] were probably without language, not the Neanderthals themselves.
What makes more sense, that vocal tracts were probably without language, or that Neanderthals were probably without language?
I'm really old, but I'll never be too old to become more educated.
-
stormier
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:45 pm
- Location: Boston
- Thanked: 20 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:720
Is it wrong to say that a singular item resembles multiple items, as in - My television resembles the televisions of my neighbors?
Neandrethals had a vocal tract that resembled those (vocal tracts) of the apes ?
Neandrethals had a vocal tract that resembled those (vocal tracts) of the apes ?
-
EducationAisle
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:42 pm
- Location: Bangalore, India
- Thanked: 91 times
- Followed by:46 members
It is not wrong to say:stormier wrote:Is it wrong to say that a singular item resembles multiple items, as in - My television resembles the televisions of my neighbors?
Neandrethals had a vocal tract that resembled those (vocal tracts) of the apes ?
My television resembles the televisions of my neighbors.
But, it is wrong to say:
My television resembles those of my neighbors.
In the above sentence, those is intended to refer to televisions, but there is no televisions mentioned in the sentence, only television. Hence, you must repeat televisions.
Similarly, the correct sentence would be:
Neandrethals had a vocal tract that resembled vocal tracts of the apes.
Ashish
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com
Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:
a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana
b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana
Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com
Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:
a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana
b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana
Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
-
EducationAisle
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:42 pm
- Location: Bangalore, India
- Thanked: 91 times
- Followed by:46 members
A very interesting thing about this sentence that I would like to draw attention to. Lets look at C, D and E. The construction would be:
1. The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's
2. they were supplanted by our own species.
Hmm...what is they referring to in C, D and E? Vocal tracts!! So, C, D and E seem to suggest that vocal tracts were supplanted by own species, but we know (from logic) that actually the Neanderthals were supplanted by own species.
Hence, C, D and E are wrong.
1. The vocal tracts of Neanderthals resembled an ape's
2. they were supplanted by our own species.
Hmm...what is they referring to in C, D and E? Vocal tracts!! So, C, D and E seem to suggest that vocal tracts were supplanted by own species, but we know (from logic) that actually the Neanderthals were supplanted by own species.
Hence, C, D and E are wrong.
Ashish
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com
Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:
a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana
b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana
Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
www.EducationAisle.com
Sentence Correction Nirvana available at:
a) Amazon: Sentence Correction Nirvana
b) Flipkart: Sentence Correction Nirvana
Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi
