OG pg. 100 #46

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Researchers have found that individuals who have been blind from birth, and who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and that they will gesture even when conversing with another blind person.

a. who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and that they will gesture
b. who thus never saw anyone gesturing, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequent and in virtually the same way as sighted people did, and that they will gesture
c. who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless made hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, as well as gesturing
d. thus never having seen anyone gesture, nevertheless made hand motions when speaking just as frequent and in virtually the same way as sighted people did, as well as gesturing
e. thus never having seen anyone gesture, nevertheless to make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and to gesture

Answer is A

My question is regarding the sentence, "nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do." This is a subordinate clause that is modifying the "individuals", but it uses an active verb "make", rather than the present perfect tense of "have + be", as in, "have been blind from birth." So my question is, when the sentence is a subordinate clause that is modifying the main clause, can we disregard its parallelism with the main clause?

Thanks.

[Night reader]

sub-clause may break out the sequence of tenses as long as the logical connection is present between the main clause and sub-clause ---> researchers have found that individuals make (OR have made) + they will gesture

Present perfect is the only tense that can be surprisingly connected in Main clause/Sub-clause pairs. One example, "Once I have scored 700+ on GMAT, I should post my success debrief on the BTG forum".

Researchers have found that individuals who have been blind from birth, and who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and that they will gesture even when conversing with another blind person.

a. who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and that they will gesture
b. who thus never saw anyone gesturing, nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequent and in virtually the same way as sighted people did, and that they will gesture
c. who thus have never seen anyone gesture, nevertheless made hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, as well as gesturing
d. thus never having seen anyone gesture, nevertheless made hand motions when speaking just as frequent and in virtually the same way as sighted people did, as well as gesturing
e. thus never having seen anyone gesture, nevertheless to make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do, and to gesture

Answer is A

My question is regarding the sentence, "nevertheless make hand motions when speaking just as frequently and in virtually the same way as sighted people do." This is a subordinate clause that is modifying the "individuals", but it uses an active verb "make", rather than the present perfect tense of "have + be", as in, "have been blind from birth." So my question is, when the sentence is a subordinate clause that is modifying the main clause, can we disregard its parallelism with the main clause?

Thanks.

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Thanks Night Reader! Good luck on the GMAT!