BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATBootcamp Starts Sep 21
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE BOOTCAMP

Live Online Bootcamp Class with Top GMAT Expert Chris Peckover

Sep 21 to Oct 9, 2026

Schedule
Mon to Fri · 7:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
Live classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class
  • 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included
View bootcamp & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

water could

Expert replies

by mundasingh123 » Fri May 27, 2011 11:49 pm
atulmangal wrote:Thought to share the given official explanation:

The original sentence incorrectly uses the verb evaporating, which cannot take a direct object; a subject, here water, can evaporate, but a subject cannot evaporate something else. In the original version of this sentence, evaporating its molecules is not a grammatical use of evaporating.

Additionally, as a result of is an adverbial phrase that does not grammatically describe a verb within the sentence. Prevented... as a result of is not an acceptable construction.

Choice C fixes these errors without introducing new ones. The subject water is prevented from evaporating, and evaporating does not incorrectly take an object. The preposition by grammatically corresponds with the verb prevented. The water is prevented from evaporating... by an insufficient level... The pronoun its clearly refers to water.

Choice D retains the ungrammatical as a result of. The use of being is awkward.

Choice E is illogical; the water is not actively preventing its molecules...

The correct answer choice is C.
Doesnt C imply that the insufficient amount of energy was trying to evaporate the water , but the energy was prevented from doing so .
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Join the discussion

by Geva@EconomistGMAT » Sat May 28, 2011 9:41 pm
mundasingh123 wrote:
atulmangal wrote:Thought to share the given official explanation:

The original sentence incorrectly uses the verb evaporating, which cannot take a direct object; a subject, here water, can evaporate, but a subject cannot evaporate something else. In the original version of this sentence, evaporating its molecules is not a grammatical use of evaporating.

Additionally, as a result of is an adverbial phrase that does not grammatically describe a verb within the sentence. Prevented... as a result of is not an acceptable construction.

Choice C fixes these errors without introducing new ones. The subject water is prevented from evaporating, and evaporating does not incorrectly take an object. The preposition by grammatically corresponds with the verb prevented. The water is prevented from evaporating... by an insufficient level... The pronoun its clearly refers to water.

Choice D retains the ungrammatical as a result of. The use of being is awkward.

Choice E is illogical; the water is not actively preventing its molecules...

The correct answer choice is C.
Doesnt C imply that the insufficient amount of energy was trying to evaporate the water , but the energy was prevented from doing so .
No, in C the MOLECULES are prevented from evaporating BY the insufficient energy.
Geva
Senior Instructor
Master GMAT
1-888-780-GMAT
https://www.mastergmat.com
Join the discussion

by Geva@EconomistGMAT » Sat May 28, 2011 9:47 pm
atulmangal wrote:OA is C guys...

Well Op E looks really tempting.

@Geva, m surprised to see your reply:
water does not actively evaporate its own molecules - the molecules can evaporate, or be evaporate (or be prevented from evporating), but water does not evaporate its own molecules - implies that water has some intent or choice in the matter.


This is exactly the reason why Op E is wrong here....because modifier Preventing is modifying the whole preceding clause...that means Op E will be read as

water preventing its molecules from evaporating by....logically incorrect as u stated above..

With Op C there is no such problem....what's wrong u find in Op C (as u said least worst Op) ??
I don't like the use of the singular pronoun to refer to "water". Water is non-countable, and thus is not plural, but it's not singular either. If used as a subject, water will agree with a singular verb("Water is the liquid of life"), but stretching this to a singular pronoun referring back to "water" seems...off. Then again, I don't think it's wrong grammatically. It's just awkward, as it highlights a problem with the grammatical rule that a non-count noun is (arbitrarily) considered a singular subject, either though it's neither plural nor singular - it's non countable.
Geva
Senior Instructor
Master GMAT
1-888-780-GMAT
https://www.mastergmat.com
Join the discussion