usage of BOTH

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:13 am

usage of BOTH

by gmatcracker0123 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:50 am
Q) When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

(A) which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing
(B) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed
(C) which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed
(D) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing
(E) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

Really liked this one!

OA D

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] » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:12 pm
Hi gmatcracker0123,

This SC is built on 2-part Parallelism and a verb rule.

1) Parallelism: The 2-part phrase "both...and" begins before the underlined portion and is correctly completed in all 5 answers, so we have to make sure that the two items are Parallel. The first item is "both broke with the...Church", so the second item must use a Parallel verb - here, it's "abandoned." Eliminate A and B. Answer E can also be eliminated since "and also" is incorrect/redundant.

2) Verbs: The reference to "Religious WARS of the 16th Century" means that we are NOT describing a point in the past, but a series of points in the past. We need an "-ing" verb to do that. Eliminate C.

Final Answer: D

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:13 am

by gmatcracker0123 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:29 pm
Thank you Rich.. what I had missed was the parallelism between broke and abandoned. Maybe not interpreting the sentence correctly was the problem !

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] » Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:39 pm
Hi gmatcracker0123,

One of the many patterns that GMAT SCs test is the "2-Part phrase"; you'll likely see at least a couple on Test Day. They range from the common ("either...or", "neither...nor", "as....as") to the rare ("just as....so..."), but they ALL require Parallelism.

As you continue to practice, part of your job will be to memorize the various phrases, then spot them (and properly complete them) when they appear, AND then make sure that the 2 phrases are Parallel. With enough practice, it will become "automatic" and you won't have to think too much about it.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:40 am
Thanked: 1 times

by Aman Ahuja » Tue Sep 16, 2014 12:05 am
I eliminated D because of (,+-ing) "who" is much more suitable to refer to the Lutherans.The -ing participle modifies the action of the previous clause and refers to the subject of the previous clause which is the Calvinists.
Not the intended meaning
Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:13 am

by gmatcracker0123 » Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:45 pm
Hi Aman,

The usage of 'who' here is implied because 'who' cannot be added along with the participle 'differing'. The noun closest to differing is Lutherans and in this case will not directly refer to Calvinists.

To make the participle 'resulting', from the first clause, parallel to the second clause, you will have to use differing.

In your case 'C' would be apt but the clauses again are not parallel as the first refers to the object i.e The act of breaking whereas the second clause would refer to the subject i.e Lutherans.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:34 am
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:4 members

by hazelnut01 » Tue Apr 04, 2017 3:44 pm
gmatcracker0123 wrote:Q) When the Calvinists could not agree with the established religious doctrine, they both broke with the Roman Catholic Church, which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing from their fellow Protestants on the doctrines of Communion and other theories of worship.

(A) which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and with the Lutherans, differing
(B) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and the Lutherans, who differed
(C) which resulted in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, who differed
(D) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and abandoned the Lutherans, differing
(E) resulting in the Religious Wars of the 16th century, and also abandoned the Lutherans, who differed

OA D
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The correct response is (D). The word "both" earlier in the sentence comes before the verb "broke", meaning that the second portion of that structure, after "and", must come with its own verb to be parallel. Choices A and B fail to supply such a verb, and are therefore wrong.

Choices A and C commit another error, using the relative pronoun "which" to start the modifier "which resulted in the Religious Wars" - that modifier needs to describe the action of the Calvinists breaking with the Roman Catholic Church, not the church itself, so the participial modifier "resulting" is necessary.

Choice E commits a redundancy error with the word "also" - since the structure is already set up for "both broke...and abandoned", so "also" is superfluous and incorrect. The correct answer is D.