• FREE GMAT Exam
Know how you'd score today for $0 Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Magoosh Study with Magoosh GMAT prep Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Trial & Practice Exam BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 5 Day FREE Trial Study Smarter, Not Harder Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Practice Test & Review How would you score if you took the GMAT Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 1 Hour Free BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 5-Day Free Trial 5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Get 300+ Practice Questions 25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Veritas GMAT Class Experience Lesson 1 Live Free Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Award-winning private GMAT tutoring Register now and save up to$200

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

OG Verbal 2016-SC# 63

tagged by: ngk4mba3236

This topic has 5 expert replies and 8 member replies
ngk4mba3236 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Posted:
176 messages
1

OG Verbal 2016-SC# 63

Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:00 pm
Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets, such as blenders and food processors, which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.

(A) which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those
(B) which can inflict serious injuries such as those
(C) inflicting injuries as serious as that having been
(D) capable to inflict injuries as serious as that
(E) capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those

OA: E

hi experts,
I'm lost between choice a & e. can you please share your analysis for this sc ?

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMATGuruNY GMAT Instructor
Joined
25 May 2010
Posted:
14188 messages
Followed by:
1820 members
13060
GMAT Score:
790
Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:22 am
ngk4mba3236 wrote:
Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets, such as blenders and food processors, which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.

(A) which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those
(B) which can inflict serious injuries such as those
(C) inflicting injuries as serious as that having been
(D) capable to inflict injuries as serious as that
(E) capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those
On the GMAT, which + PLURAL VERB must serve to refer to the NEAREST PRECEDING PLURAL NOUN.
To my knowledge, no OA has deviated from this rule.
A: food processors, which are able to inflict
Here, which are (which + plural verb) seems to refer to food processors (the nearest preceding plural noun), implying that FOOD PROCESSORS are ABLE TO INFLICT injuries.
The intended meaning is that a specific subset of GADGETS can cause injuries, as in the OA:
Kitchens are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets capable of inflicting injuries.
Food processors are merely an EXAMPLE of this type of high-speed electrical gadget.
Eliminate A.

If the verb attributed to which can be singular or plural, the referent for which must be the NEAREST PRECEDING NOUN.
To my knowledge, no OA has deviated from this rule.
B: food processors, which can inflict
Here, can inflict could be singular or plural.
As a result, which can inflict seems to refer to food processors, implying that FOOD PROCESSORS CAN INFLICT injuries.
The intended meaning is that a specific subset of GADGETS can cause injuries, as in the OA:
Kitchens are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets capable of inflicting injuries.
Food processors are merely an EXAMPLE of this type of high-speed electrical gadget.
Eliminate B.

In C and D, that lacks a singular referent.
Eliminate C and D.

Other errors in A:

On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.

A: to inflict as serious injuries
Here, the portion in red would be appropriate to convey that something is inflicted in the form of a serious injury, as follows:
During the fight, John was able to inflict as serious injuries three very large gashes.
Not the intended meaning.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.
Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.
fabiocafarelli Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
09 Feb 2016
Posted:
105 messages
Followed by:
2 members
57
Fri Apr 15, 2016 2:00 am
Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets, such as blenders and food processors, which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.

(A) which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those
(B) which can inflict serious injuries such as those
(C) inflicting injuries as serious as that having been
(D) capable to inflict injuries as serious as that
(E) capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those

1. Option A says that the gadgets in kitchens are ABLE to perform a certain action. In Sentence Correction, the verb TO BE ABLE and the noun ABILITY are used to refer only to living organisms. This would allow you to eliminate option A.

2. Option A also uses the relative pronoun WHICH in apposition to BLENDERS AND FOOD PROCESSORS. It therefore refers to them. But these are merely EXAMPLES of the gadgets in question, and the intention of the sentence is to say that HIGH-SPEED ELECTRICAL GADGETS in general, and not merely the examples, can cause injuries. WHICH therefore confuses the meaning of the sentence.

3. In option A you also have the structure AS SERIOUS INJURIES AS. But something is AS SERIOUS AS or AS INTERESTING AS or AS OLD AS something else: in such comparisons of equality, the noun or pronoun that is the first term of the comparison (INJURIES, in this case) must precede the phrase AS + ADJECTIVE + AS, and the second term of the comparison (THOSE, in this case) must follow it. in other words, a construction that inserts the adjective into the middle of the comparison, as this one does, is incorrect.

4. Option E constructs the phrase correctly: INJURIES AS SERIOUS AS THOSE. It replaces ABLE with CAPABLE and uses the correct idiom: CAPABLE OF INFLICTING. And the absence of WHICH avoids the confusion created by that pronoun in option A.

If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.

Try our online GMAT prep

aflaam Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
02 Jan 2016
Posted:
132 messages
Followed by:
1 members
4
Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:36 pm
CAN SOME ONE TELL ME WHY b IS WRONG?
I thought in can vs capable split, can is given preference.

fabiocafarelli Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
09 Feb 2016
Posted:
105 messages
Followed by:
2 members
57
Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:31 am
1. Option B is wrong because in the first place it changes the meaning of the given sentence: there, you have to observe that the intention is to make a comparison between the seriousness of injuries caused by kitchen gadgets and the seriousness of injuries caused by a particular machine. Nevertheless, in option B, the comparison disappears and instead you have an exemplification of certain kinds of injuries.

2. Option B, like option A, uses the relative pronoun WHICH in apposition to BLENDERS AND FOOD PROCESSORS. It therefore refers to them. But these are merely EXAMPLES of the gadgets in question, and the intention of the sentence is to say that HIGH-SPEED ELECTRICAL GADGETS in general, and not merely the examples, can cause injuries. WHICH therefore confuses the meaning of the sentence.

3. Note that there are no mistakes of a grammatical or idiomatic kind in option B. Its defects are all involved with the question of meaning.

If you like this post, please click on the THANK icon.

Try our online GMAT prep

ngk4mba3236 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Posted:
176 messages
1
Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:14 pm
hi experts@gmat verbal,
could you please share your analysis for this SC (and also please shed light on my concerns mentioned in the first post) ?

p.s: gmatguru/david@veritas/rich/ceilidh - it'd great to hear your feedback on this guys! any other experts also feel free to share yours. thank you!

ngk4mba3236 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Posted:
176 messages
1
Fri Apr 22, 2016 7:55 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.
is there any deviation of this rule on GMAT ?

GMATGuruNY wrote:
A: to inflict as serious injuries
Here, the portion in red would be appropriate to convey that something is inflicted in the form of a serious injury, as follows:
During the fight, John was able to inflict as serious injuries three very large gashes.
Not the intended meaning.
didn't get this explanation clearly...

intended meaning is: kitchen gadgets cause serious injuries as those (re injuries) caused by an industrial wood-planing machine -- that means,injuries caused by these kitchen gadgets and by industrial machine are similar in terms of seriousness.

so how this meaning is distorted by this particular phrase - inflict as serious injuries as those ?

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMATGuruNY GMAT Instructor
Joined
25 May 2010
Posted:
14188 messages
Followed by:
1820 members
13060
GMAT Score:
790
Fri Apr 22, 2016 10:33 am
ngk4mba3236 wrote:
GMATGuruNY wrote:
On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.
is there any deviation of this rule on GMAT ?

To my knowledge, the GMAT has never deviated from this rule.

GMATGuruNY wrote:
A: to inflict as serious injuries
Here, the portion in red would be appropriate to convey that something is inflicted in the form of a serious injury, as follows:
During the fight, John was able to inflict as serious injuries three very large gashes.
Not the intended meaning.
didn't get this explanation clearly...
When as + NOUN PHRASE immediately follows a VERB FORM, it generally serves as an ADVERB modifying the preceding verb form.

The girls want to work as free-lance writers.
Here, as free-lance writers is an adverb modifying to work (the immediately preceding verb form).
Question: HOW do the girls want to work?

Two free tickets were offered as compensation.
Here, as compensation is an adverb modifying were offered (the immediately preceding verb).
Question: HOW were two free tickets offered?

Answer choice A implies the following:
Food processors are able to inflict as serious injuries.
Here, as serious injuries seems to be an ADVERB serving to modify to inflict (the immediately preceding verb form).
Question: HOW are food processors able to inflict?
This meaning is nonsensical, implying that the usage of as serious injuries is incorrect.

To convey the intended meaning, injuries must serve not as part of an adverb but as a DIRECT OBJECT, as in the OA:
Here, injuries serves not as part of an adverbial as-modifier but as the direct object of inflicting.
Question: WHAT are gadgets capable of inflicting?
Answer: They are capable of inflicting INJURIES.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.
Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.
ngk4mba3236 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Posted:
176 messages
1
Sat Apr 23, 2016 10:30 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
When as + NOUN PHRASE immediately follows a VERB FORM, it generally serves as an ADVERB modifying the preceding verb form.

Answer choice A implies the following:
Food processors are able to inflict as serious injuries.
Here, as serious injuries seems to be an ADVERB serving to modify to inflict (the immediately preceding verb form).
Question: HOW are food processors able to inflict?
This meaning is nonsensical, implying that the usage of as serious injuries is incorrect.
gmatguru,
can understand most of your earlier reply. just a quick clarification needed on the above quote:

if we consider option A along with the rest of the sentence, then the structure evolves - "food processors...are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by...machine". so here, although as + NOUN PHRASE immediately follows a VERB FORM, the portion after "as + NOUN PHRASE" contains as + PRONOUN as part of the comparison depicted in this sc.

so, not able to get how this complete structure -- VERB FORM + as + NOUN PHRASE + as + PRONOUN -- becomes incorrect! because in GMAT comparison , we get structure like as NOUN as NOUN/PRONOUN, I guess!

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMATGuruNY GMAT Instructor
Joined
25 May 2010
Posted:
14188 messages
Followed by:
1820 members
13060
GMAT Score:
790
Sat Apr 23, 2016 5:18 pm
ngk4mba3236 wrote:
GMATGuruNY wrote:
When as + NOUN PHRASE immediately follows a VERB FORM, it generally serves as an ADVERB modifying the preceding verb form.

Answer choice A implies the following:
Food processors are able to inflict as serious injuries.
Here, as serious injuries seems to be an ADVERB serving to modify to inflict (the immediately preceding verb form).
Question: HOW are food processors able to inflict?
This meaning is nonsensical, implying that the usage of as serious injuries is incorrect.
gmatguru,
can understand most of your earlier reply. just a quick clarification needed on the above quote:

if we consider option A along with the rest of the sentence, then the structure evolves - "food processors...are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by...machine". so here, although as + NOUN PHRASE immediately follows a VERB FORM, the portion after "as + NOUN PHRASE" contains as + PRONOUN as part of the comparison depicted in this sc.

so, not able to get how this complete structure -- VERB FORM + as + NOUN PHRASE + as + PRONOUN -- becomes incorrect! because in GMAT comparison , we get structure like as NOUN as NOUN/PRONOUN, I guess!

as + NOUN + as + NOUN/PRONOUN is not a viable structure.
The correct structure is as + MODIFIER + as + NOUN/PRONOUN.
Examples:
Highway 5 is as LONG as HIGHWAY 10.
Mary exercises as FREQUENTLY as STEVE.
Cars as POPULAR as THOSE produced last year
.

A: as serious injuries as those
This structure is unidiomatic, since the first as may NOT be followed by a noun.
The proper structure -- as + MODIFIER + as + NOUN/PRONOUN -- is given in the OA:
injuries as SERIOUS as THOSE caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.
Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.
Mo2men Legendary Member
Joined
25 Sep 2015
Posted:
579 messages
Followed by:
5 members
14
Sun Apr 24, 2016 8:41 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
ngk4mba3236 wrote:
Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets, such as blenders and food processors, which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.

(A) which are able to inflict as serious injuries as those
(B) which can inflict serious injuries such as those
(C) inflicting injuries as serious as that having been
(D) capable to inflict injuries as serious as that
(E) capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those
On the GMAT, which + PLURAL VERB must serve to refer to the NEAREST PRECEDING PLURAL NOUN.
To my knowledge, no OA has deviated from this rule.
A: food processors, which are able to inflict
Here, which are (which + plural verb) seems to refer to food processors (the nearest preceding plural noun), implying that FOOD PROCESSORS are ABLE TO INFLICT injuries.
The intended meaning is that a specific subset of GADGETS can cause injuries, as in the OA:
Kitchens are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets capable of inflicting injuries.
Food processors are merely an EXAMPLE of this type of high-speed electrical gadget.
Eliminate A.

If the verb attributed to which can be singular or plural, the referent for which must be the NEAREST PRECEDING NOUN.
To my knowledge, no OA has deviated from this rule.
B: food processors, which can inflict
Here, can inflict could be singular or plural.
As a result, which can inflict seems to refer to food processors, implying that FOOD PROCESSORS CAN INFLICT injuries.
The intended meaning is that a specific subset of GADGETS can cause injuries, as in the OA:
Kitchens are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets capable of inflicting injuries.
Food processors are merely an EXAMPLE of this type of high-speed electrical gadget.
Eliminate B.

In C and D, that lacks a singular referent.
Eliminate C and D.

Other errors in A:

On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.

A: to inflict as serious injuries
Here, the portion in red would be appropriate to convey that something is inflicted in the form of a serious injury, as follows:
During the fight, John was able to inflict as serious injuries three very large gashes.
Not the intended meaning.
Hi Mitch,

In OA E, 'capable of ......' is modifier stars with adjective.

comma + adjective modifies the nearest noun or noun phrase. So it may also modify 'food processors' not gadgets, the same as choice A & B? Why is Choice E considered right in this case?

Is there any deviation from the rule.

Do I miss something here?

Thanks

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMATGuruNY GMAT Instructor
Joined
25 May 2010
Posted:
14188 messages
Followed by:
1820 members
13060
GMAT Score:
790
Sun Apr 24, 2016 3:17 pm
Mo2men wrote:
Hi Mitch,

In OA E, 'capable of ......' is modifier stars with adjective.

comma + adjective modifies the nearest noun or noun phrase. So it may also modify 'food processors' not gadgets, the same as choice A & B? Why is Choice E considered right in this case?

Is there any deviation from the rule.

Do I miss something here?

Thanks
COMMA + ADJECTIVE serves to modify the nearest preceding noun when the purpose of the comma is to indicate that the adjective is a nonessential modifier.
The Mochica developed their own elaborate society, based upon the cultivation of such crops as corn and beans.
Here, the purpose of the comma before based (adjective) is to indicate that this adjective is a nonessential modifier.
As a result, COMMA + based serves to modify society (the nearest preceding noun).

OA: Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets, such as blenders and food processors, capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.
Here, the purpose of the comma before capable is NOT to indicate that this adjective is a nonessential modifier.
Rather, this comma serves -- in conjunction with the comma before such -- to indicate that the PORTION IN RED is a nonessential modifier.
Since a nonessential modifier is just that -- NONESSENTIAL -- we can remove it without altering the core meaning of the sentence.
If we remove this nonessential modifier, we get:
Many kitchens today are equipped with high-speed electrical gadgets capable of inflicting injuries as serious as those caused by an industrial wood-planing machine.
In the resulting sentence, capable clearly serves to modify gadgets.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.
Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.
ngk4mba3236 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
18 Mar 2016
Posted:
176 messages
1
Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:50 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.
gmatguru,
is it always followed on GMAT ? I mean, do we see any deviation of this rule on GMAT ?

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMATGuruNY GMAT Instructor
Joined
25 May 2010
Posted:
14188 messages
Followed by:
1820 members
13060
GMAT Score:
790
Wed Jun 08, 2016 2:16 am
ngk4mba3236 wrote:
GMATGuruNY wrote:
On the GMAT, the words able and ability should not be ascribed to an inanimate object such as a food processor or a gadget.
gmatguru,
is it always followed on GMAT ? I mean, do we see any deviation of this rule on GMAT ?
To my knowledge, no OA from GMAC has ascribed able or ability to an inanimate object.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.
Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.

Top First Responders*

1 GMATGuruNY 70 first replies
2 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma... 42 first replies
3 Brent@GMATPrepNow 40 first replies
4 Jay@ManhattanReview 24 first replies
5 Terry@ThePrinceto... 10 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

Most Active Experts

1 GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

133 posts
2 Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

113 posts
3 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

111 posts
4 Jeff@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

111 posts
5 Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

90 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts