The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany including , three wooden spears that archaeologists believe to be about 400,000 years old.
(A) merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
(B) as merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from examining tools found in Germany, which include
(C) as mere meat scavengers, has emerged from examining tools found in Germany that includes
(D) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, which includes
(E) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
[spoiler]OA is E, but what is wrong with C. If C were "that include" instead of "that includes" would it be correct? Also does "that" modify Germany?[/spoiler]
Stone Age
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:14 pm
- Thanked: 331 times
- Followed by:11 members
We need has(sing verb) and not have so elimninate A,B
Couple of reasons to elimnate C,D
C-> uses "that" which as worded refers to Gemany the nearest noun
X RATHER THAN Y is the idiom
X->systematic hunters of large animals
Y->mere scavengers of meat
We dont need "as" again since it violates the idiomatic usage
D-> which refers to germany the nearest noun and changes the meaning
Hence E
Couple of reasons to elimnate C,D
C-> uses "that" which as worded refers to Gemany the nearest noun
X RATHER THAN Y is the idiom
X->systematic hunters of large animals
Y->mere scavengers of meat
We dont need "as" again since it violates the idiomatic usage
D-> which refers to germany the nearest noun and changes the meaning
Hence E
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
parallel structure is one reason why (c) is worse than (d) or (e).
to wit, look at the blue parts below. note that "rather than" is a one-part signal - i.e., unlike two-part constructions such as "both ... and" and "not only ... but also", it lacks a left-hand part indicating the beginning of the first parallel element. therefore, you can choose to start the first parallel element wherever you want - meaning that you can choose to include or exclude "as" at your convenience:
(c)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than as mere meat scavengers, has...
this parallelism is acceptable, but there are two undesirable things:
* "hunters OF large animals" isn't truly parallel to "meat scavengers"
* "meat scavengers" is awkward / unclear (you probably won't know this unless you're a native speaker of english and/or a writer)
(d)(e)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than mere scavengers of meat, has...
this is better parallelism (notice that "as" is excluded from the first part this time).
* note the EXACT parallelism between "hunters OF large animals" and "scavengers OF meat".
also, (c) implies, unambiguously (and absurdly), that germany itself "includes" 3 wooden spears.
(3 all the way!)
to wit, look at the blue parts below. note that "rather than" is a one-part signal - i.e., unlike two-part constructions such as "both ... and" and "not only ... but also", it lacks a left-hand part indicating the beginning of the first parallel element. therefore, you can choose to start the first parallel element wherever you want - meaning that you can choose to include or exclude "as" at your convenience:
(c)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than as mere meat scavengers, has...
this parallelism is acceptable, but there are two undesirable things:
* "hunters OF large animals" isn't truly parallel to "meat scavengers"
* "meat scavengers" is awkward / unclear (you probably won't know this unless you're a native speaker of english and/or a writer)
(d)(e)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than mere scavengers of meat, has...
this is better parallelism (notice that "as" is excluded from the first part this time).
* note the EXACT parallelism between "hunters OF large animals" and "scavengers OF meat".
also, (c) implies, unambiguously (and absurdly), that germany itself "includes" 3 wooden spears.
(3 all the way!)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
also
by far the easiest way to kill (c) is subject-verb agreement: "includes" (singular) doesn't make sense, because "tools" (the clearly intended antecedent) is plural.
there is also a VERY subtle difference in meaning here, which is wholly idiomatic.
namely:
if you say "tools that include X", then X is A COMPONENT of the tools. so, for instance, "tools that include a bottle opener" means that a bottle opener is one of many attachments.
on the other hand, "tools(,) including X" implies that X is ONE OF the tools. so, for instance, "tools(,) including a bottle opener" means that the bottle opener itself is one of the tools in question.
clearly, S-V agreement is the easier way to go.
by far the easiest way to kill (c) is subject-verb agreement: "includes" (singular) doesn't make sense, because "tools" (the clearly intended antecedent) is plural.
there is also a VERY subtle difference in meaning here, which is wholly idiomatic.
namely:
if you say "tools that include X", then X is A COMPONENT of the tools. so, for instance, "tools that include a bottle opener" means that a bottle opener is one of many attachments.
on the other hand, "tools(,) including X" implies that X is ONE OF the tools. so, for instance, "tools(,) including a bottle opener" means that the bottle opener itself is one of the tools in question.
clearly, S-V agreement is the easier way to go.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
thanks!lunarpower wrote:parallel structure is one reason why (c) is worse than (d) or (e).
to wit, look at the blue parts below. note that "rather than" is a one-part signal - i.e., unlike two-part constructions such as "both ... and" and "not only ... but also", it lacks a left-hand part indicating the beginning of the first parallel element. therefore, you can choose to start the first parallel element wherever you want - meaning that you can choose to include or exclude "as" at your convenience:
(c)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than as mere meat scavengers, has...
this parallelism is acceptable, but there are two undesirable things:
* "hunters OF large animals" isn't truly parallel to "meat scavengers"
* "meat scavengers" is awkward / unclear (you probably won't know this unless you're a native speaker of english and/or a writer)
(d)(e)
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than mere scavengers of meat, has...
this is better parallelism (notice that "as" is excluded from the first part this time).
* note the EXACT parallelism between "hunters OF large animals" and "scavengers OF meat".
also, (c) implies, unambiguously (and absurdly), that germany itself "includes" 3 wooden spears.
(3 all the way!)
if we were given only 2 option to choose from...which one of the following will u choose
1) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools that include
2) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools, which include
1) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools that include
2) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools, which include
yeah but somewhere I read that when you use which instead of that then it is fine cos that is restrictive and which is not. Thats the reason I chose D.
Can someone shed some more light between D and E please?
Can someone shed some more light between D and E please?
200 or 800. It don't matter no more.
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
both are wrong in this context (not grammatically), as both would imply that spears were components of the tools.priyank12 wrote:if we were given only 2 option to choose from...which one of the following will u choose
1) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools that include
2) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools, which include
i'm not enamored of recommending an incorrect option over another incorrect option, and it's unwise practice for anyone else to do so (so i hope no one else attempts to answer this dilemma).
--
in a different context, this boils down to the difference between "essential modifiers" and "nonessential modifiers". that's a difference that is entirely contextual, not grammatical: i.e., it depends entirely on the meaning of what you're saying.
this is a topic that is covered at length on numerous websites. if you want to know more, google the aforementioned terms for more (and more detailed) information than could possibly be posted here.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:57 pm
- Thanked: 3 times
The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including three wooden spears that archaeologists believe to be about 400,000 years old.
(A) merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
(B) as merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from examining tools found in Germany, which include
(C) as mere meat scavengers, has emerged from examining tools found in Germany that includes
(D) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, which includes
(E) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
My answer: E
"systematic hunters of large animals" rather than ____
where the blank should follow the previous verb phrase. "mere scavengers of meat" fits this best.
comma preceding "which includes" makes it awkward.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 292
- Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:39 am
- Thanked: 6 times
- Followed by:1 members
Hi Ron,apple100 wrote:The new image of Stone Age people as systematic hunters of large animals, rather than merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany including , three wooden spears that archaeologists believe to be about 400,000 years old.
(A) merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
(B) as merely scavenging for meat, have emerged from examining tools found in Germany, which include
(C) as mere meat scavengers, has emerged from examining tools found in Germany that includes
(D) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, which includes
(E) mere scavengers of meat, has emerged from the examination of tools found in Germany, including
[spoiler]OA is E, but what is wrong with C. If C were "that include" instead of "that includes" would it be correct? Also does "that" modify Germany?[/spoiler]
I have a number of your post, wherein you have mentioned that 'comma+verbing' modifies the subject of the clause. If that is correct will it be appropriate to say 'including' modifies tools. While attempting this question I eliminated E just on that logic.
Pls help
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
ah, yes.pnk wrote:I have a number of your post, wherein you have mentioned that 'comma+verbing' modifies the subject of the clause. If that is correct will it be appropriate to say 'including' modifies tools. While attempting this question I eliminated E just on that logic.
Pls help[/b]
important:
"INCLUDING" is an EXCEPTION to the otherwise robust rules for comma+ing modifiers.
when you see "comma + including", you should NOT think of "including" as "__ing".
you should think of it as a random word that's not an "__ing" word; it just happens to be dressed that way. it qualifies the previous NOUN (or NOUN+modifiers), by giving a PARTIAL list (not a complete list!) of examples.
thanks for pointing this out / calling it to our attention -- we'll be sure to include it in our revised unit on modifiers in the course.
Last edited by lunarpower on Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- e-GMAT
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:42 pm
- Location: US
- Thanked: 527 times
- Followed by:227 members
Great catch!!!
In fact Question#120 in OG12 also displays this usage. In non-underlined portion of the sentence, including is used with comma and it modifies the preceding noun - personality traits.
Regards,
Payal
In fact Question#120 in OG12 also displays this usage. In non-underlined portion of the sentence, including is used with comma and it modifies the preceding noun - personality traits.
Regards,
Payal
Register for free live sessions
Sentence Correction: Get 4 free video lessons, 50 practice questions
Critical Reasoning workshop: Get 4 free video lessons, 40 practice questions
Reading Comprehension: Get 2 free video lessons and 2 free eBooks
Free Strategy Session: Key strategy to score 760
Success Stories
V27 to V42 | V28 to V48 | V25 to V38 | More Success Stories
Sentence Correction: Get 4 free video lessons, 50 practice questions
Critical Reasoning workshop: Get 4 free video lessons, 40 practice questions
Reading Comprehension: Get 2 free video lessons and 2 free eBooks
Free Strategy Session: Key strategy to score 760
Success Stories
V27 to V42 | V28 to V48 | V25 to V38 | More Success Stories