Scaori Tribes made great use of the Kalahari pig: it was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut for bow strings.
A. pig: it was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut
B. pig: it was a source of meat, and its hide used for clothing, with its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut used
C. pig: which was a source of meat, with its hide used for clothing, hooves for fat, as well as its sinews and gut used
D. pig: which, as well as being a source of meat, its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut were
E. pig: with, as well as being a source of meat, its hide used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut
I'm confused between B and D. Can any experts help?
Scaori Tribes made great use of the Kalahari pig: it was a s
This topic has expert replies
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:48 pm
- Followed by:1 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
- ErikaPrepScholar
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 503
- Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:03 am
- Thanked: 86 times
- Followed by:15 members
- GMAT Score:770
Looking at answer choice A, there isn't anything obviously wrong right off the bat - we have two independent clauses (things that can stand on their own as complete sentences) separated by a colon (an acceptable use of a colon):
Scaori Tribes made great use of the Kalahari pig. It was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut for bow strings.
We also have two independent clauses separated by a comma + and:
It was a source of meat. Its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut for bow strings.
Finally, we have a parallel list:
-Its hide was used for clothing
-Its hooves (implied was used) for fat
-Its sinews and gut (implied were used) for bow strings
So we'll see if we can eliminate the other answer options.
B. We again have a comma + and, so everything before should be an independent clause, and everything after should be an independent clause:
It was a source of meat. Its hide used for clothing, with its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut used for bow strings.
We notice that without "was" we don't have a verb after the comma + and, which means it isn't an independent clause, creating a comma splice.
We also see that our list is no longer parallel:
-Its hide used for clothing
-With its hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut used for bow strings
Eliminate B.
C. "Which" after a colon is never, ever used - we *can* have a dependent clause after a colon, but "which" only ever follows a comma.
Our list is also no longer parallel:
-Its hide used for clothing
-Hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut used for bow strings
Eliminate C.
D. Again, "which" after a colon is not acceptable. Similarly, the list is not parallel:
-Its hide was used for clothing
-Its hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut were for bow strings
Eliminate D.
E. Like "which", "with" should follow a comma, not a colon. Similarly, breaking up "with its hide used for clothing" with "as well as being a source of meat" is an awkward and unclear construction. Finally, "being" is a common feature of unclear and wordy answer options. (Surprisingly, however, this list is parallel!) Eliminate E.
This leaves us with A as the correct answer.
Scaori Tribes made great use of the Kalahari pig. It was a source of meat, and its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut for bow strings.
We also have two independent clauses separated by a comma + and:
It was a source of meat. Its hide was used for clothing, its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut for bow strings.
Finally, we have a parallel list:
-Its hide was used for clothing
-Its hooves (implied was used) for fat
-Its sinews and gut (implied were used) for bow strings
So we'll see if we can eliminate the other answer options.
B. We again have a comma + and, so everything before should be an independent clause, and everything after should be an independent clause:
It was a source of meat. Its hide used for clothing, with its hooves for fat, and its sinews and gut used for bow strings.
We notice that without "was" we don't have a verb after the comma + and, which means it isn't an independent clause, creating a comma splice.
We also see that our list is no longer parallel:
-Its hide used for clothing
-With its hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut used for bow strings
Eliminate B.
C. "Which" after a colon is never, ever used - we *can* have a dependent clause after a colon, but "which" only ever follows a comma.
Our list is also no longer parallel:
-Its hide used for clothing
-Hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut used for bow strings
Eliminate C.
D. Again, "which" after a colon is not acceptable. Similarly, the list is not parallel:
-Its hide was used for clothing
-Its hooves for fat
-Its sinews and gut were for bow strings
Eliminate D.
E. Like "which", "with" should follow a comma, not a colon. Similarly, breaking up "with its hide used for clothing" with "as well as being a source of meat" is an awkward and unclear construction. Finally, "being" is a common feature of unclear and wordy answer options. (Surprisingly, however, this list is parallel!) Eliminate E.
This leaves us with A as the correct answer.
Erika John - Content Manager/Lead Instructor
https://gmat.prepscholar.com/gmat/s/
Get tutoring from me or another PrepScholar GMAT expert: https://gmat.prepscholar.com/gmat/s/tutoring/
Learn about our exclusive savings for BTG members (up to 25% off) and our 5 day free trial
Check out our PrepScholar GMAT YouTube channel, and read our expert guides on the PrepScholar GMAT blog