GMAT Prep Q SC (that..and that..construction)

[BearcatBoy45220]

Source GMAT Prep:

Blaming its recent troubles on a widening recession and slow rate technology spending the computer company announced that it would cut 10 percent of its workforce-more than 2,000 jobs-and expected to report a loss in its quarter


A. computer company announced that it would cut 10 percent of its workforce-more than 2,000 jobs-and expected to report a
B. company announced that there would be a cut-10 percent of its workforce which was more than 2000 jobs-and expected a reported
C. company announced the cutting of its workforce by 10 percent, more than 2000 jobs and it expected a reported
D. company’s announcement included the cutting of its workforce by 10 percent, or more than 2000 jobs, and expecting to report a
E. company’s announcement included the cutting of its workforce - which is more than 2000 jobs and expecting there to be reported

The answer for the above question is A.

In this case, can somebody explain why "˜that’ is not needed following "˜and’ to satisfy the construction " <noun> that.....and that...." ?

-Mathew

[tim]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

[Willy]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

Sir, if you say THAT is not the part of the parallelism, to which I agree (as checking from right to left on parallelism), then parallelism definitely starts after THAT i.e. from it would cut ....

And second part of the parallel structure is

...and expected to report a loss....

I am not able to figure out how these two are parallel? Are these parallel because both talk (or have a sense of) about events in future i.e. WOULD and EXPECTED. As both are not realized at present?

Please help.

[BearcatBoy45220]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

My understanding is that "would" and "expected" are parallel here..

Only reason I can think of why a second 'that' is not needed is because of 'ellipsis'.

Without omission of repeated words, it seems to me that this sentence will be "...company announced that it would cut....and that it excepted...".

Is it because of ellipsis the answer choice does not have another that following 'and' ?

-Matt

[BearcatBoy45220]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

My understanding is that "would" and "expected" are parallel here..

Only reason I can think of why a second 'that' is not needed is because of 'ellipsis'.

Without omission of repeated words, it seems to me that this sentence will be "...company announced that it would cut....and that it excepted...".

Is it because of ellipsis the answer choice does not have another that following 'and' ?

-Matt

Yup got it...I understand the issue here..

announced and expected are parallel here...two independent facts conjoined using 'and'....

company announced...and expected....

Is this correct?

-Matt

[Willy]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

My understanding is that "would" and "expected" are parallel here..

Only reason I can think of why a second 'that' is not needed is because of 'ellipsis'.

Without omission of repeated words, it seems to me that this sentence will be "...company announced that it would cut....and that it excepted...".

Is it because of ellipsis the answer choice does not have another that following 'and' ?

-Matt

From where did you get the "IT" (highlighted above)? Even if I assume THAT is part of ellipsis but I don't think IT is also included in ellipsis, if it is working here. BTW, I don't think ellipsis is working here. The only reason as I can see as said by Tim above is THAT not included in the parallelism. Parallel parts starts after THAT.

Can you please explain how "would" and "expected" are parallel? I am confused with it. If "would" and "expected" are parallel then there is no issue of ellipsis.

[BearcatBoy45220]

let's have you do this: tell us why you think the word "that" should be required. :) in other words, accepting the correct answer as correct, can you identify the words that are parallel? i'll give you a hint - if "that" isn't repeated, it's not part of what is parallel..

My understanding is that "would" and "expected" are parallel here..

Only reason I can think of why a second 'that' is not needed is because of 'ellipsis'.

Without omission of repeated words, it seems to me that this sentence will be "...company announced that it would cut....and that it excepted...".

Is it because of ellipsis the answer choice does not have another that following 'and' ?

-Matt

From where did you get the "IT" (highlighted above)? Even if I assume THAT is part of ellipsis but I don't think IT is also included in ellipsis, if it is working here. BTW, I don't think ellipsis is working here. The only reason as I can see as said by Tim above is THAT not included in the parallelism. Parallel parts starts after THAT.

Can you please explain how "would" and "expected" are parallel? I am confused with it. If "would" and "expected" are parallel then there is no issue of ellipsis.

See my second post. I was wrong regarding ellipsis..parallel ones are announced and expected...

-Mathew

[Willy]

Thank you for the reply but I am not sure whether

company announced...and expected....

are parallel parts. It is really a confusing sentence, so I will wait for experts comment on it.

[tim]

based on context, i would say that "would" is parallel to "expected", although "announced" would be another way of interpreting it..

i'm not sure why you guys are talking about "ellipsis", but i think Ron and i have both gone on record confirming that we don't know what this is, and that should tell you something. :) i don't know if our book talks about ellipsis, but i can assure you it NEVER has anything relevant to do with parallelism..

[BearcatBoy45220]

based on context, i would say that "would" is parallel to "expected", although "announced" would be another way of interpreting it..

i'm not sure why you guys are talking about "ellipsis", but i think Ron and i have both gone on record confirming that we don't know what this is, and that should tell you something. :) i don't know if our book talks about ellipsis, but i can assure you it NEVER has anything relevant to do with parallelism..

Okay..

So it seems to me that second 'that' in "that......and that..." construction is flexible and this can be removed if idea/structure is parallel when looking at the sentence from right to left..

(My confusion here is that in certain OG SC problems, explanation given for choosing correct answer is proper usage of "<noun> that....and that..." construction and this doesn't seem to hold true here)

-Matt

[tim]

well, it's better to think not of removing the "that" from the left hand side, but rather never putting it in at all if you find the parallel thing you're looking for on the left before you reach the "that"..

[Willy]

based on context, i would say that "would" is parallel to "expected", although "announced" would be another way of interpreting it..

i'm not sure why you guys are talking about "ellipsis", but i think Ron and i have both gone on record confirming that we don't know what this is, and that should tell you something. :) i don't know if our book talks about ellipsis, but i can assure you it NEVER has anything relevant to do with parallelism..

Thank you for the reply Sir. I will also forget ellipsis from now onward. :)

[tim]

that has worked for me and Ron! :)