The Academia Sectrorum Naturae, the first scientific community, was founded in 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission.
a) 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission
b) 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, you had to have made the discovery of a new law of nature
c) 1560 with a prerequisite for admission: the discovery of a new law of nature
d) the year 1560, including the prerequisite that to be admitted, you needed to have discovered a new law of nature
e) 1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
Please explain each answer choice. OA after some discussion.
Thanks.
The Academia Sectrorum Naturae
This topic has expert replies
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:42 pm
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:2 members
D looks good to me.
a)included in membership .
b)a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, seems redundant
c)looks incomplete
e)1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
Whats the OA
a)included in membership .
b)a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, seems redundant
c)looks incomplete
e)1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
Whats the OA
- vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
IMO C
a) 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission - redundant and wrong usage of 'included in'
b) 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, you had to have made the discovery of a new law of nature - redundant
c) 1560 with a prerequisite for admission: the discovery of a new law of nature - correct
d) the year 1560, including the prerequisite that to be admitted, you needed to have discovered a new law of nature - founding did not INCLUDE prerequisite & second "," is not required
e) 1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
a) 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission - redundant and wrong usage of 'included in'
b) 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, you had to have made the discovery of a new law of nature - redundant
c) 1560 with a prerequisite for admission: the discovery of a new law of nature - correct
d) the year 1560, including the prerequisite that to be admitted, you needed to have discovered a new law of nature - founding did not INCLUDE prerequisite & second "," is not required
e) 1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:42 pm
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:2 members
vikram4689 wrote:IMO C
a) 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission - redundant and wrong usage of 'included in'
b) 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, you had to have made the discovery of a new law of nature - redundant
c) 1560 with a prerequisite for admission: the discovery of a new law of nature - correct
d) the year 1560, including the prerequisite that to be admitted, you needed to have discovered a new law of nature - founding did not INCLUDE prerequisite & second "," is not required
e) 1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite
on second thoughts,D looks wrong..
- bubbliiiiiiii
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 am
- Location: Hyderabad, India
- Thanked: 49 times
- Followed by:12 members
- GMAT Score:700
gmat1978 wrote:The Academia Sectrorum Naturae, the first scientific community, was founded in 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission.
a) 1560, and in order to be included in membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, a prerequisite for admission - parallelism error
b) 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission: in order to be included, you had to have made the discovery of a new law of nature - parallelism error
c) 1560 with a prerequisite for admission: the discovery of a new law of nature
d) the year 1560, including the prerequisite that to be admitted, you needed to have discovered a new law of nature
e) 1560 with the rule that in order to be admitted for membership, you had to discover a new law of nature, that was the prerequisite - Wordy
IMO C seems to be best among all.
Thanks.
Regards,
Pranay
Pranay
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:22 am
- Followed by:1 members
hi bubliiiiii....
Can you please make me understand why there is a parallelism error in B.
The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission... removing the appositive.. isn't it says.. The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560 and The Academia Sectrorum Naturae included a prerequisite for admission... I think that is fine. I understand that there are other problems in B as mentioned by Vikram, but I guess parallelism problem acc. to you is not an issue at hand.
Please let me know whether I am correct or not.
Thanks
Gautam
Can you please make me understand why there is a parallelism error in B.
The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560, and included a prerequisite for admission... removing the appositive.. isn't it says.. The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560 and The Academia Sectrorum Naturae included a prerequisite for admission... I think that is fine. I understand that there are other problems in B as mentioned by Vikram, but I guess parallelism problem acc. to you is not an issue at hand.
Please let me know whether I am correct or not.
Thanks
Gautam
- bubbliiiiiiii
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 am
- Location: Hyderabad, India
- Thanked: 49 times
- Followed by:12 members
- GMAT Score:700
Here, I think you are making included parallel to was founded, which is wrong.The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560 and The Academia Sectrorum Naturae included a prerequisite for admission... I think that is fine.
Ideally, included should be parallel to founded. When we try to do that we see that,
was founded ... included ..
which means, verb was is applicable to included and founded. Now read the statement as under,
The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was founded in 1560[/b] and The Academia Sectrorum Naturae was included a prerequisite for admission.
To me, though they are parallel, it doesnot make sense to me. Thus, I feel that there is parallelism issue.
Please let me know if you have any further concerns.
Regards,
Pranay
Pranay
- Ozlemg
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:19 am
- Thanked: 25 times
- Followed by:7 members
IMO C
GMAT test makers do not like "in order to" and most of the times wrong answer choices involve this!
GMAT test makers do not like "in order to" and most of the times wrong answer choices involve this!
The more you suffer before the test, the less you will do so in the test!