Sentence Correction

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry, not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive.

A. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and aree
B. being slow to dry and not very absorbent, and
C. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and
D. slow to dry and not very absorbent, and they are
E. slow to dry and not very absorbent, and that they are















_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[spoiler]O.A: C[/spoiler]
I first chose D, that was because this parallel form confused me. If the 4 terms of "slow to dry, not very absorbent, harsh, abrasive" are parallel to each other, then there is only one "and" before the last item. Why there are two "and" appeared in this sentence. That's why I thought there should be a complete sentence after the first "and".

Please explain, thanks!

yvonne0923 wrote:Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry, not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive.

A. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and aree
B. being slow to dry and not very absorbent, and
C. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and
D. slow to dry and now very absorbent, and they are
E. slow to dry and not very absorbent, and that they are

____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[spoiler]O.A: C[/spoiler]
I first chose D, that was because this parallel form confused me. If the 4 terms of "slow to dry, not very absorbent, harsh, abrasive" are parallel to each other, then there is only one "and" before the last item. Why there are two "and" appeared in this sentence. That's why I thought there should be a complete sentence after the first "and".

Please explain, thanks!

The problem with Op D is the word NOW...which distorts the meaning of the sentence...otherwise Op D contains 3 Independent clauses, marked in different colors below

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry and now very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

Thats seems okay to me, just the word NOW is wrong.

For Op C its a clear case of parallelism, though i didn't get your question but see below the elaborated structure of Op C

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry, [are]not very absorbent, and [are] harsh and abrasive.

atulmangal wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry, not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive.

A. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and aree
B. being slow to dry and not very absorbent, and
C. slow to dry, not very absorbent, and
D. slow to dry and now very absorbent, and they are
E. slow to dry and not very absorbent, and that they are

____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[spoiler]O.A: C[/spoiler]
I first chose D, that was because this parallel form confused me. If the 4 terms of "slow to dry, not very absorbent, harsh, abrasive" are parallel to each other, then there is only one "and" before the last item. Why there are two "and" appeared in this sentence. That's why I thought there should be a complete sentence after the first "and".

Please explain, thanks!

The problem with Op D is the word NOW...which distorts the meaning of the sentence...otherwise Op D contains 3 Independent clauses, marked in different colors below

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry and now very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

Thats seems okay to me, just the word NOW is wrong.

For Op C its a clear case of parallelism, though i didn't get your question but see below the elaborated structure of Op C

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry, [are]not very absorbent, and [are] harsh and abrasive.

I'm sorry that I have typed wrong word "now" in the choice D, I have to corrected it to "not" already, then how can I filter out choice D now?

There are three items that have to be parallel: "slow to dry", "not very absorbent", and "harsh and abrasive". C is the only one that does that correctly.

In D the items in the list are: "slow to dry", "and not very absorbent", and "and they are harsh and abrasive". These are not parallel.

If D read "are slow to dry, are not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive", it would be correct. You have to have "are" in front of each of the three, or only the first.

Alternatively you could say "they are slow to dry, they are not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive". This form would be correct but wordy.

@Tani

I agree with you that Op C is better and all the items are a part of list, but still have some confusion in Op D, please clear.

Op D

i agree that slow to dry, not very absorbent, and harsh and abrasive, all of these are properties of Towel and should be a part of list, but can't we put two items of this list in one clause and place the other in other clause, please see below

The new towels are slow to dry and [ARE] not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

Both the clauses in color, appears to me as Independent clauses and connected with COMMA + FANBOYS correctly, also THEY is not ambiguous. Now, the bracketed [ARE] in bold i assigned in first clause...is that wrong and violates parallelism?????

Does this structure where a list of 3 items is distributed in 2 clauses, rather than just one as in Op C is wrong and distorts meaning????

One more question: semicolon connects 2 Independent clauses. here also we have semicolon in non-underlined part. so

structure of Op C is:

Independent clause; Independent clause ----> correct

structure of Op D is:

Independent clause; Independent clause COMMA + FANBOY Independent clause

Is the above structure correct??? i think yes but i think first time i have seen such structure so please confirm.

I asked too many questions here and it may take some of your precious time, so thanks for sharing your knowledge and time with us Mam.

Best Regards
Atul

atulmangal wrote:@Tani

I agree with you that Op C is better and all the items are a part of list, but still have some confusion in Op D, please clear.

Op D

i agree that slow to dry, not very absorbent, and harsh and abrasive, all of these are properties of Towel and should be a part of list, but can't we put two items of this list in one clause and place the other in other clause, please see below

The new towels are slow to dry and [ARE] not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

Both the clauses in color, appears to me as Independent clauses and connected with COMMA + FANBOYS correctly, also THEY is not ambiguous. Now, the bracketed [ARE] in bold i assigned in first clause...is that wrong and violates parallelism?????

Does this structure where a list of 3 items is distributed in 2 clauses, rather than just one as in Op C is wrong and distorts meaning????

The GMAT is the environmental protector of the verbal world - when in doubt, reduce reduce reduce.

If an idea is clearly expressed in two answer choices and one of those choices uses fewer words, then the shorter choice will be correct. The extra "and" that you propose serves no grammatical purpose, so is uneconomical and should be avoided.

It's OK to have the "and" in "harsh and abrasive" because the two words together form 1 of the items on the list (think of "harsh and abrasive" as "sweet and sour" - the whole phrase expresses one characteristic).

@Stuart

Thanks a lot for the post sir. I got your point regarding concision and i'm completely agree to the OA. Just want to clear my basics regarding the concept of parallelism sir, that why, i'm again asking this question that is Op D violates parallelism????

Op D

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry and not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

@tani mam said Op D violates parallelism,

In D the items in the list are: "slow to dry", "and not very absorbent", and "and they are harsh and abrasive". These are not parallel.

If D read "are slow to dry, are not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive", it would be correct. You have to have "are" in front of each of the three, or only the first.

believe me i tried but didn't get the clarity because i'm reading Op D in this way:

The new towels are slow to dry and [ARE] not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

The clauses are correctly connected by COMMA + AND. Also the clause in green color follows parallelism...so why Op D violates parallelism?? M i missing something here???? Please suggest.

atulmangal wrote:@Stuart

Thanks a lot for the post sir. I got your point regarding concision and i'm completely agree to the OA. Just want to clear my basics regarding the concept of parallelism sir, that why, i'm again asking this question that is Op D violates parallelism????

Op D

Buyers at a department store have discovered that the last shipment of towels the store received was subpar in quality; the new towels are slow to dry and not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

@tani mam said Op D violates parallelism,

In D the items in the list are: "slow to dry", "and not very absorbent", and "and they are harsh and abrasive". These are not parallel.

If D read "are slow to dry, are not very absorbent, and are harsh and abrasive", it would be correct. You have to have "are" in front of each of the three, or only the first.

believe me i tried but didn't get the clarity because i'm reading Op D in this way:

The new towels are slow to dry and [ARE] not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

The clauses are correctly connected by COMMA + AND. Also the clause in green color follows parallelism...so why Op D violates parallelism?? M i missing something here???? Please suggest.

Even i feel that Both option C and option D are correct. Option D joins two main clauses using ,and . But Just to stick to concise option I will go with option C.

In my opinion, GMAT sentence correction is so much more than spotting grammar errors in a sentence. The first thing that should come to mind is - how can the meaning be sent across in the most clear and concise manner.

Here we are expressing the limiting characteristics of a towel. Why would we write something like -

The new towels are slow to dry and not very absorbent, and they are harsh and abrasive.

Isn't this a terrible way to write a sentence? I don't think such a construction would find much favor with GMAT.

I'll give an example.

1. Rick likes comic books, sports cars, and fast food.

2. Rick likes comic books and sports cars, and he likes fast food.

Sentence 2 does not violate any grammar rule, but is a terrible way to express the thought. Similar is the case with option D in the stated sentence.

There is no logical reason to set "harsh and abrasive" aside in a separate clause. If the sentence said "The new towels are slow to dry and not very absorbent, but they are a beautiful color", you would have a reason to divide the descriptors, but when you have three negatives, it is awkward and confusing to split the list into separate clauses.