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

Redeem

weird parallelism: expert's opinion will be appreciated

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sun Apr 28, 2013 3:38 am
imskpwr wrote:Proponents of the recent banking law changes assert that federal deregulation of investment procedures has neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not compromised the government's basic long-term commitment to the free market.

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly or

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly, nor has it

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and it has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition, increased corporate monopoly, nor has it
I received a PM requesting that I comment.

Neither means not one or the other.
Neither should serve to refer only to TWO things.
In the SC above, THREE actions are being discussed: exposed, increased, compromised.
Thus, the use of neither in A, B and E is inappropriate.
Eliminate A, B and E.

In D, not...nor...and is unidiomatic.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is C.

The OA employs the following idiom: not X or Y, nor Z.
This idiom is appropriate for a list of three things:
Federal regulation has not EXPOSED or INCREASED, nor has it COMPROMISED.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:45 am
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:1 members

by imskpwr » Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:51 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
imskpwr wrote:Proponents of the recent banking law changes assert that federal deregulation of investment procedures has neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not compromised the government's basic long-term commitment to the free market.

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly or

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly, nor has it

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and it has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition, increased corporate monopoly, nor has it
I received a PM requesting that I comment.

Neither means not one or the other.
Neither should serve to refer only to TWO things.
In the SC above, THREE actions are being discussed: exposed, increased, compromised.
Thus, the use of neither in A, B and E is inappropriate.
Eliminate A, B and E.

In D, not...nor...and is unidiomatic.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is C.

The OA employs the following idiom: not X or Y, nor Z.
This idiom is appropriate for a list of three things:
Federal regulation has not EXPOSED or INCREASED, nor has it COMPROMISED.
reply is AWESOME as usually.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:00 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by conquistador » Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:56 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
imskpwr wrote:Proponents of the recent banking law changes assert that federal deregulation of investment procedures has neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not compromised the government's basic long-term commitment to the free market.

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and also has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly or

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly, nor has it

not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition nor increased corporate monopoly, and it has not

neither exposed smaller banks to unfair competition, increased corporate monopoly, nor has it
I received a PM requesting that I comment.

Neither means not one or the other.
Neither should serve to refer only to TWO things.
In the SC above, THREE actions are being discussed: exposed, increased, compromised.
Thus, the use of neither in A, B and E is inappropriate.
Eliminate A, B and E.

In D, not...nor...and is unidiomatic.
Eliminate D.

The correct answer is C.

The OA employs the following idiom: not X or Y, nor Z.
This idiom is appropriate for a list of three things:
Federal regulation has not EXPOSED or INCREASED, nor has it COMPROMISED.
option C as complete sentence looks as below
Proponents of the recent banking law changes assert that federal deregulation of investment procedures
has
not exposed smaller banks to unfair competition or increased corporate monopoly,
nor has it compromised the government's basic long-term commitment to the free market.
As per the rule of parallelism, has is making the sentence incorrect as parallelism is flawed........
even nor is not followed by verb as in case of not exposed or increased.

Please explain?

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:28 pm
FANBOYS are conjunctions that serve to connect one independent clause to another.
The FANBOYS are for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so.
When nor serves as one of the FANBOYS, it is always preceded by a NEGATIVE CLAUSE and followed by a VERB.
John did NOT attend the ceremony, nor DID he celebrate at the party.
Mechmeera wrote:As per the rule of parallelism, has is making the sentence incorrect as parallelism is flawed........
even nor is not followed by verb as in case of not exposed or increased.
In the OA, nor is serving as one of the FANBOYS and thus is correctly preceded by a negative clause and followed by a verb:
Federal regulation has NOT exposed or increased, nor HAS it compromised.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:50 am
Thanked: 11 times

by thang » Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:39 am
we use neither...nor before two noun, not before two verb
that is why A is wrong.
looking for the girl living in Bradford UK, visiting Halong bay, Vietnam on 26- 27 Jan 2014. all persons, pls, forward this message to all persons you know to help me find her: my email: [email protected], call: 84904812758