Hello forum,
I am about to learn the SC section with the help of the MGMAT book. A problem that I face is, that in the beginning it seems that for every GMAT SC question there will be a rule how to solve this. With "rule" I mean a hard fact thing (if x = y and y=z, then x=z). But today with solving the following sentenced it often feels like it is more of an "experience" thing, or something you need to "feel".
Today I studied chapter 4 "Parallelism" and came across some sentences:
For example this one:
Sal applied himself in his new job, arriving early every day, skipping lunch regularly, and leaving late every night.
It says that this sentence is correct, even though the first phrase "Sal applied himself" is not parallel to the two participle phrases "skipping" and "leaving". The reason is that the first sentence is somehow the main clause and kind of "superior" to the other two.
So please, can somebody explain this? I mean, I understand the explanation, but how can this be a "hard" rule?? For non-native speaker this is more an understanding problem and hearing is some parts of the sentence are superior/inferior to others....
Another question with Parallelism is, where do I know WHAT I have to make parallel. In the book it says it can be almost everything (from verbs, to adjectives, to whole phrases etc.).
So I came across this sentence which I could not solve:
The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than the material was difficult.
How can I know that the word "because" needs to be made parallel and not for example "because + subject"?
Correct sentence: The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than because the material was difficult.
Tobacco companies, shaken by a string of legal setback in the US, but which retain strong growth prospects in the developing world, face an uncertain future.
Where do I know that I have to modify the phrase "shaken by a string" in this particular way: "which have been shaken by a string"? And not for example in this way: "which were shaken by a string"? The corresponding phrase is "which retain strong growth prospects", but where do I see that I need to include a "have been"? I cannot see it in the corresponding phrase...
Sorry that my questions are poorly written. I am a non-native and this parallelism thing drives me mad :/
Any answers and explanations (for dummies pls) are much appreciated
I am about to learn the SC section with the help of the MGMAT book. A problem that I face is, that in the beginning it seems that for every GMAT SC question there will be a rule how to solve this. With "rule" I mean a hard fact thing (if x = y and y=z, then x=z). But today with solving the following sentenced it often feels like it is more of an "experience" thing, or something you need to "feel".
Today I studied chapter 4 "Parallelism" and came across some sentences:
For example this one:
Sal applied himself in his new job, arriving early every day, skipping lunch regularly, and leaving late every night.
It says that this sentence is correct, even though the first phrase "Sal applied himself" is not parallel to the two participle phrases "skipping" and "leaving". The reason is that the first sentence is somehow the main clause and kind of "superior" to the other two.
So please, can somebody explain this? I mean, I understand the explanation, but how can this be a "hard" rule?? For non-native speaker this is more an understanding problem and hearing is some parts of the sentence are superior/inferior to others....
Another question with Parallelism is, where do I know WHAT I have to make parallel. In the book it says it can be almost everything (from verbs, to adjectives, to whole phrases etc.).
So I came across this sentence which I could not solve:
The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than the material was difficult.
How can I know that the word "because" needs to be made parallel and not for example "because + subject"?
Correct sentence: The students did poorly on the test more because they had not studied than because the material was difficult.
Tobacco companies, shaken by a string of legal setback in the US, but which retain strong growth prospects in the developing world, face an uncertain future.
Where do I know that I have to modify the phrase "shaken by a string" in this particular way: "which have been shaken by a string"? And not for example in this way: "which were shaken by a string"? The corresponding phrase is "which retain strong growth prospects", but where do I see that I need to include a "have been"? I cannot see it in the corresponding phrase...
Sorry that my questions are poorly written. I am a non-native and this parallelism thing drives me mad :/
Any answers and explanations (for dummies pls) are much appreciated
