It is unclear whether chimpanzees are unique among nonhuman

[tim]

I would certainly use the same reasoning on this one.

[RonPurewal]

I had rejected options (B) and (D) because of the use of phrase with as much depth instead of in as much depth. I thought we do not study something with depth, we study something in depth.

Was this reason appropriate?

yes.

...but, as always, please read the entire thread (or, at a minimum, all of the moderators' posts) before commenting.
this question is already answered in the last line of this post:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p118238

thanks.

[NinaP494]

Yes, even I sensed some awkwardness while reading option B, but I could not use that awkwardness to eliminate B.

Also I had one thing in mind , in option B there is no comma before they, and whole sentence is written as if there were no if-else case. Is it legitimate way to eliminate option B?, or GMAT tests such subtle errors?.

Thanks a lot .

it's not subtle.
this part of B...
if other animals were studied with as much depth they would exhibit similar patterns
...is a complete sentence.

you can't have "whether X will happen OR [complete sentence]". a modifier (= a fraction of a sentence) can never be parallel to a whole sentence.

Ron: so, we can never join two independent clauses with 'whether'. is that what you're saying? So a sentence like this - "I am not clear whether we have the money to fund this project or the last project completely drained our coffers." can't be grammatically correct?

Until this point, I always thought 'use of whether' is justified in this way as long as we are talking about two alternate possibilities. So I thought option B was talking about the following two alternatives
1) Chimps are unique b'cuz of a certain trait
2) there are other animals who would exhibit the same trait if they were studied in as much depth (and thus chimps cant be unique)

thus single 'whether' should suffice.

your comment is much appreciated. thanks

[RonPurewal]

no, the point is that you can't put "whether xxxxx" -- which isn't a complete sentence -- in parallel with something that's actually a complete sentence.

context matters here.
in the example at hand, "whether xxxx" would be the first parallel element, and the complete sentence would be the second one. that's impossible.

YOU are trying to create a sentence in which "whether" ISN'T part of the parallel construction.
in other words, you're actually creating a sentence whose grammatical construction is completely different from the one at hand.

[NinaP494]

Thanks Ron. I am much sorted on this

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[Alok chandraS808]

Dear Ron,

I read you explanation regarding the 'would + noun + be' usage in a statement. I did not know this before. Thanks for the info.
Though, I chose option E over option D because the structure of option E is similar to that of non-underlined portion.
whether chimps are unique among ~ whether other animals would exhibit
whereas in option D the subject is not animals.
Am I correct in believing such structure(as of E) is preferred?

TIA,
Alok.

[RonPurewal]

"preferred" isn't a thing. either something works or it doesn't.

as for what's wrong with choice D, that has already been explained here. please read the ENTIRE DISCUSSION THREAD before commenting. thank you.

[KevinS587]

I don't quite understand what on earth is "in as much depth"... It seems kind of irrelevant with this question, but I just can't get it.

Why there's an "as much"? as much as what? Does it mean "as much AS NOW CHIMPANZEES WERE STUDIED" ? but if so, why can we omit it given it's not mentioned in or similar to any context in the sentence?

Plz enlighten me.

[fionaw752]

(D) whether similar patterns would be exhibited in other animals that were studied with as much depth

Hi, Ron.
I eliminate choice D because one of the parallels is "chimpanzees", (an animal), another parallel is "patterns". i think the intending meaning is to make same kinds of things paralleled, in which case is "chimpanzees" VS "other animals", is this idea right? please correct me. thank you.

[RonPurewal]

i'm not sure what you are trying to ask.

remember, "parallel" basically means "could be 'bullet points' or '#1', '#2', etc. on a powerpoint slide".

there are 2 parallel structures here: "whether xxxxx" and "whether yyyyyy" (= the TWO IDEAS that are UNCLEAR).
it doesn't make sense to try to pick out smaller parts from WITHIN these and attempt to call them "parallel". (think about whether you could make "bullet points" from those things on a powerpoint slide.)

[RonPurewal]

also—
in your first question, it seems you're trying to put "chimpanzees" in parallel with "patterns".

i'm not 100% sure whether you're trying to do that—but it should be clear that "chimpanzees" and "patterns" COULD NOT be parallel, in ANY reasonable context!

[KevinS587]

Hi Ron, I think you might mistakenly thought the two questions above were asked by a same person.

My doubt is that "Why there's an "as much"?", since it's kind of puzzling for me. Thanks a lot.

[RonPurewal]

the other half of that comparison is implied by the earlier part of the sentence, so there's no "as" (...in case that's what you're asking... are you asking why there isn't an "as"?).

the same thing can happen with "more ... than", too—i.e., the "than" can be omitted, if a comparison to something mentioned earlier is implied.
e.g.,
The class enrollment will be strictly limited to 25, because none of the available rooms can fit any more students.
(implied comparison = "more than 25")

[KevinS587]

the other half of that comparison is implied by the earlier part of the sentence, so there's no "as" (...in case that's what you're asking... are you asking why there isn't an "as"?).

the same thing can happen with "more ... than", too—i.e., the "than" can be omitted, if a comparison to something mentioned earlier is implied.
e.g.,
The class enrollment will be strictly limited to 25, because none of the available rooms can fit any more students.
(implied comparison = "more than 25")

Thanks a lot, Ron! However, I'm still kind of missing..

Since the sentence is "...if they were studied in as much depth", I reckoned that the OMITTED part should be paralleled with "they were studied in", thus it should be "...in as much depth as chimpanzees were studied in", am I correct?

But if so, why it's omitted? I mean, since "chimpanzees were studied in" is not mentioned or stated, though "implied", in the sentence. Shouldn't it be paralleled with "they were studied" and this omit makes it obscure?

Thanks ahead!