Caribou are wary animals

[RonPurewal]

Also, in choice e, the construction " close enough in order to kill " is correct? I know that "enough to do " is correct
Thanks

no.
depending on how you view the situation, it's either...
...redundant (since 'enough' conveys the entire meaning by itself),
or
...contradictory (since 'enough to...' and 'in order to...' mean different things).

either way, it's not valid.

[RichaChampion]

Nope. That's a different animal. That's "ones"; this is "one".

Despite their ostensible similarity, "one" (as used here) is completely unrelated to "ones".

The plural form of "one", as used in this sentence, is "some". (I had too many apples, so I gave some to the food bank.)

The Plural form of one is "ones" or some.?

[RonPurewal]

you have already quoted the exact answer to your question, so, what is still unclear?



(the plural of "the one..." would be "the ones...", but that's an entirely different construction.)

[JeJ99]

Hi Instructor,

Could you please explain if the parallelism here is to be maintained between stalk and get? or to stalk or to kill?

If the former then shouldn't the 'to' be repeated?

[RonPurewal]

the parallel construction is "stalk ... and get close ..."

there's no reason why "to" would need to be repeated. (in fact, this sentence would make LESS sense if "to" were repeated, although that difference is not something this exam would ever test.)

[ReenaG885]

I am confused about the usage of "them" versus "it" in this sentence. Shouldn't the sentence consistently refer one or the other?

[RonPurewal]

the correct answer doesn't contain "it".

[RonPurewal]

(a correct sentence COULD be written with both "them" and "it"—if the word "one" were used, and then "it" in reference to "one".
such a sentence would have to say more things than this sentence says, but, it could certainly exist.)

[Gui]

[quote="eyunni"]Caribou are wary animals with excellent hearing, so stalking them over the treeless landscape, getting close enough to kill it with nothing but a handheld lance, as Dorset people did, required exceptional hunting skill.

(A) so stalking them over the treeless landscape, getting close enough to kill it

(B) so to stalk them over the treeless landscape and get close enough to kill one

(C) so in order to stalk them over the treeless landscape and get close enough to kill one

(D) and so in order to stalk it over the treeless landscape, getting close enough to kill it

(E) and so stalking them over the treeless landscape and getting close enough in order to kill it

In answer choice 'a' the modifier "..., getting close enough...," is wrong? I know that the there is a pronoun issue here, but why the modifier is wrong here? Does it need to parallel with stalking?

Many tks!

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

I would say that the modifier is incorrect here. To be clear, the modifier is 'getting close enough to kill it'. This is what I call a "comma -ing" modifier (also called a participle modifier). It usually gives extra information about the clause it's modifying, often showing the result of an action. For example:
Julie told a funny joke, making everyone laugh.
Here we can see that the 'fact that Julie told a funny joke' is what made everyone laugh. The clause has a verb: 'told'. But in the example above, it's not clear what's being modified as the verb 'required' is so far away. On top of this, we might get confused that 'getting' looks like it should be parallel to 'stalking'.
However, despite the problems with this modifier, note that GMAT gives you a more secure way to eliminate answer A. Perhaps they consider it too subtle or subjective an issue to be tested in isolation.

[Gui]

Thank you!

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

You're welcome. No need to quote my whole post in your reply.