By pressing a tiny amount of nitrogen between two diamonds

[tim]

What you're referring to is playing the role of an appositive, which allows this type of construction. It is worth noting however, that a "not" would preclude this construction from being valid. In other words, you could say "I have many clients, typically ship owners", but you could not say "I do not have many clients, typically ship owners". This is one thing preventing the adverb-without-verb from being used in the sentence near the bottom of page two. The ",but" is another.

[aflaamM589]

Mymisc( poster who asked this question)
Additionally, I now found "not...but RATHER...'. Is this the same as 'not...but...'


RON:
grammatically, it's the same thing.
in terms of meaning/rhetoric it's essentially the same as just "not ... but", but with extra emphasis on the fact that you are replacing an expected possibility with a different reality

Is same true for " not...but INSTEAD..." ?
Yes i think, but want to confirm.

[RonPurewal]

basically the same, yes.

[Crisc419]

What you're referring to is playing the role of an appositive, which allows this type of construction. It is worth noting however, that a "not" would preclude this construction from being valid. In other words, you could say "I have many clients, typically ship owners", but you could not say "I do not have many clients, typically ship owners". This is one thing preventing the adverb-without-verb from being used in the sentence near the bottom of page two. The ",but" is another.

"Introduced by Italian merchants resident in London during the sixteenth century, life insurance in England remained until the end of the seventeenth century a specialized contract between individual underwriters and their clients, typically ship owners, overseas merchants, or professional moneylenders."

sorry, i still don't understand your explanation about the example above, could you elaborate on this a little more?

thanks very much.

Cris

[RonPurewal]

i actually don't know the terminology that tim is using, either.

what is your specific question?
can you ask it without reference to grammar terms, please?

thank you.

[Crisc419]

i actually don't know the terminology that tim is using, either.

what is your specific question?
can you ask it without reference to grammar terms, please?

thank you.

I am asking why in the sentence"....and their clients, typically ship owners, overseas merchants, or professional moneylenders", we use an adverb "typically" without a verb together and here we must use a verb "is/are" together with "simply".
Tim has given some explanations, but i still cannot understand.

could you elaborate on this question a bit more?

thanks in advance.

cris

[RonPurewal]

that's a good question—it's one of the best questions i've seen posted here lately.

basically, here's the difference:

• "not X but Y":
this construction implies that X is what's "normal" or "expected", and that Y is what's actually true.
e.g.,
I was surprised to learn that Ella was not Clint's biological daughter but in fact his adopted daughter, since her facial features so closely resemble his.
(here, since the girl looks so much like her dad, we EXPECT to find out that she's his biological daughter.)

• "X but Y":
this just implies a contrast, but NOT any expectation.
(in THIS PARTICULAR sentence—as already explained in this thread—the "X" part includes the word "not".)
e.g.,
I am not a mechanic, but can perform basic maintenance on non-hybrid cars.

__

this sentence DOES describe a contrast—these things aren't products of natural selection, BUT they ARE products of essentially random selection processes.

on the other hand, it DOES NOT describe any sort of situation with an "expected" or "predictable" result.

thus it should not use the first construction; it should use the second one.
to make this sentence into "X, but Y", we need to include the are on the right-hand side.

[AkS182]

As criminal activity on the Internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.

A. they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and sell
B. they can also pilfer valuable information that includes business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, and selling
C. also pilfering valuable information including business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans, selling
D. but also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans to sell
E. but also pilfering valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contract bidding plans and selling

The second description EXPANDS or GOES BEYOND the first, so "but (also)" should be used according to the explanation on the first page.
Why D is wrong though? Does "but also pilfer ... to sell" in (D) change the meaning? I assumed that "they pilfer information to sell" is logically correct as thieves steal information IN ORDER to sell it.
Why in (A) " to pilfer ... and sell" should be parallel to each other? Is it because "but also pilfer" does not have a subject in it like the first part: "not only are thieves"



Thanks!

OA: A

[RonPurewal]

not only are thieves able to xxxx ...

that's a whole clause/sentence, with a subject AND a verb. (the subject and "are" are in inverted order, as per custom for this construction -- but it's clear that they're both there.)

...so, to maintain basic parallelism, "but" has to be followed by a subject AND a verb.

in choice D there's only a verb, so, choice D is non-parallel in the most fundamental way. eliminate.

parallelism is the most fundamental error in all of GMAT SC! don't look at ANY other type of error until you've considered basic parallelism!

[HuazeS358]

that's a good question—it's one of the best questions i've seen posted here lately.

basically, here's the difference:

• "not X but Y":
this construction implies that X is what's "normal" or "expected", and that Y is what's actually true.
e.g.,
I was surprised to learn that Ella was not Clint's biological daughter but in fact his adopted daughter, since her facial features so closely resemble his.
(here, since the girl looks so much like her dad, we EXPECT to find out that she's his biological daughter.)

• "X but Y":
this just implies a contrast, but NOT any expectation.
(in THIS PARTICULAR sentence—as already explained in this thread—the "X" part includes the word "not".)
e.g.,
I am not a mechanic, but can perform basic maintenance on non-hybrid cars.

__

this sentence DOES describe a contrast—these things aren't products of natural selection, BUT they ARE products of essentially random selection processes.

on the other hand, it DOES NOT describe any sort of situation with an "expected" or "predictable" result.

thus it should not use the first construction; it should use the second one.
to make this sentence into "X, but Y", we need to include the are on the right-hand side.

Still hard to understand. How can we apply it when we have the test.

[esledge]

Still hard to understand. How can we apply it when we have the test.

That part of Ron's explanation focused a lot on meaning: expectation vs. no expectation. It seems right to me, but in 20+ years of taking the test, I've never had to know this. I'd encourage you to just recognize that:

(1) "but" is a FANBOY, so used alone it generally goes after a comma to connect two clauses, or it's used as part of an idiom such as "not only X, but (also) Y"
(2) you should check the parallelism of those two parts of the sentence
(3) those two parts should contrast in meaning to some degree. The GMAT (in my opinion) is extremely unlikely to test you on how the meanings contrast.

[JbhB682]

Hi - based on the contents of this thread, my take-away was the over-riding idiom is Not ___(X)___ But __(Y)___

From this over-riding idiom, generates other idioms such as
1) Not Only X but also Y
2) Not Only X but Y
3) Not Only X but Y also

The 2nd half : "But _______" cannot be dropped in the over-riding idiom nor in the three generated idioms as well

So then how can option (a) be the OA then in the below question then ?

The idiom is (A) seems to be Not ___(X)___ , ___(Y)___

Where is second half - "But __(Y) " in option A ?

Thank you !

[JbhB682]

Question :


https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p125487

[esledge]

Here's what our All the Verbal strategy guide has to say about this idiom:

NOT . . . BUT
RIGHT:
She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT ATE other kinds of fruit.
She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT LIKED other kinds of fruit AND later BEGAN to like kiwis, too.
A tomato is NOT a vegetable BUT a fruit.
A tomato is NOT a vegetable BUT RATHER a fruit.
------------------------------------------------------
WRONG: She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT other kinds of fruit.

NOT ONLY . . . BUT ALSO
RIGHT:
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots, BUT ALSO sandals. (The comma is optional.)
We wore NOT JUST boots BUT ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT sandals.
------------------------------------------------------
SUSPECT:
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT sandals AS WELL.
We wore boots AND ALSO sandals.
------------------------------------------------------
WRONG:
We wore NOT ONLY boots AND ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT, AS WELL, sandals.

So I don't have a great answer for your question below:

So then how can option (a) be the OA then in the below question then ?

The idiom is (A) seems to be Not ___(X)___ , ___(Y)___

Where is second half - "But __(Y) " in option A ?

In the question you linked back to, (apparently correct) choice (A) says:

...not only are thieves able to divert ..., they can also pilfer...and sell…

This doesn’t match any of the acceptable idioms listed, so I too wonder about the lack of a “but.” However, notice all the good parallelism between the elements:
thieves = they
able to = can
divert = pilfer and sell

I wonder what the source of that question was. (If it’s official, we might want to update our list to say that “NOT ONLY clause, clause” could be OK. But since this is probably not an official question, this might just be someone’s error or a very rare exception.)

HOWEVER, what stands out to me in both the “thieves” question and the “nitrogen/diamonds/semiconductor” question is that NONE of the other choices had acceptable parallelism, so you were never required to eliminate on the basis of the idiom or parallel markers themselves. The take-away here should really be: If you see an Idiom that requires parallelism, check the parallel elements first and worry about the idiom itself last.

[ScottD643]

Here's what our All the Verbal strategy guide has to say about this idiom:

NOT . . . BUT
RIGHT:
She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT ATE other kinds of fruit.
She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT LIKED other kinds of fruit AND later BEGAN to like kiwis, too.
A tomato is NOT a vegetable BUT a fruit.
A tomato is NOT a vegetable BUT RATHER a fruit.
------------------------------------------------------
WRONG: She DID NOT EAT mangoes BUT other kinds of fruit.

NOT ONLY . . . BUT ALSO
RIGHT:
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots, BUT ALSO sandals. (The comma is optional.)
We wore NOT JUST boots BUT ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT sandals.
------------------------------------------------------
SUSPECT:
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT sandals AS WELL.
We wore boots AND ALSO sandals.
------------------------------------------------------
WRONG:
We wore NOT ONLY boots AND ALSO sandals.
We wore NOT ONLY boots BUT, AS WELL, sandals.

So I don't have a great answer for your question below:

So then how can option (a) be the OA then in the below question then ?

The idiom is (A) seems to be Not ___(X)___ , ___(Y)___

Where is second half - "But __(Y) " in option A ?

In the question you linked back to, (apparently correct) choice (A) says:

...not only are thieves able to divert ..., they can also pilfer...and sell…

This doesn’t match any of the acceptable idioms listed, so I too wonder about the lack of a “but.” However, notice all the good parallelism between the elements:
thieves = they
able to = can
divert = pilfer and sell

I wonder what the source of that question was. (If it’s official, we might want to update our list to say that “NOT ONLY clause, clause” could be OK. But since this is probably not an official question, this might just be someone’s error or a very rare exception.)

HOWEVER, what stands out to me in both the “thieves” question and the “nitrogen/diamonds/semiconductor” question is that NONE of the other choices had acceptable parallelism, so you were never required to eliminate on the basis of the idiom or parallel markers themselves. The take-away here should really be: If you see an Idiom that requires parallelism, check the parallel elements first and worry about the idiom itself last.

Greetings:

Under the Atlas explanation, provided on the Manhattan PREP website:

(A) As criminal activity on the internet becomes more and more sophisticated, not only are thieves able to divert cash from company bank accounts, they can also pilfer valuable information such as business development strategies, new product specifications, and contact bidding plans, and sell the data to competitors.”

“The correct answer (A) uses a rare variant on the common ‘not only x, but also y’ idiom.”

“You can (also) say ‘not only X, also Y’ in certain circumstances.
This variant is more commonly used when you have a full subject and verb (a full sentence) for the X and Y portions.
For example, this sentence is correct:
Not only does she study every night, she also volunteers at the animal shelter every weekend.”

My question is the following:

The only circumstances under which this type of construction has appeared involved a fronted, “negative” phrase such that an inverted subject-verb structure is required in the “X” portion.

ex: “Not only did Columbus refuse to accept the conventional wisdom that the earth was flat, he also pressed relentlessly for royal support….”

I do believe that the inverted structure is the only such circumstance I’ve encountered in the official questions. Would you happen to be privy to any other correct examples?

And are the prior 4 pages in this thread an example of the developing nature of the SC section and the GMAT exam, in general? I.e., since this construction appeared in an official answer, there is no doubt that the prior statements on page 1 (in which this type of sentence was called a Run-On) are incorrect?

Thank you for your help and all the best.