Just like the background in art history . . .

[Guest]

Just like the background in art history needed by an archaeologist in order to evaluate finds of ancient art, the nautical archaeologist needs specialized knowledge of the history and theory of ship design in order to understand shipwrecks.

A.
B. Just as an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art, a
C. Just as an archaeologist needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art, so a
D. Like the archaeologist who evaluates finds of ancient art and requires a background in art history, so the
E. As evaluating finds of ancient art requires an archaeologist who has a background in art history, so the


Answer is C.

What is the usage of "so" ?

[Selvae]

just as .... so is idiomatic in C

[RonPurewal]

just as .... so is idiomatic in C

yes.

just memorize this as a 2-piece parallelism signal. unlike most parallelism signals, though, it requires an independent clause after each part (a relatively unusual construction).

i've always hated this construction, because the more concise "just as ... [nothing] ..." - i.e., the same construction, without the "so" - is also idiomatic. therefore, the "so", in my opinion, is pointlessly wordy, unless it relieves the sentence of some ambiguity.

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

[goelmohit2002]

Can someone please tell which grammar rule is broken by option E ?

I think as for option A....

Just like is always wrong in GMAT....Please correct if my thinking is wrong...

[goelmohit2002]

just as .... so is idiomatic in C

yes.

just memorize this as a 2-piece parallelism signal. unlike most parallelism signals, though, it requires an independent clause after each part (a relatively unusual construction).

i've always hated this construction, because the more concise "just as ... [nothing] ..." - i.e., the same construction, without the "so" - is also idiomatic. therefore, the "so", in my opinion, is pointlessly wordy, unless it relieves the sentence of some ambiguity.

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

Thanks Ron,

Does it mean that after "just as"...we always have to follow independent clause ?

i.e. Just as X, Y
Just as X, so Y
Just as X

Does all the above are correct in GMAT and in all the above both X and Y are independent clauses ?

[RonPurewal]

Does it mean that after "just as"...we always have to follow independent clause ?

i.e. Just as X, Y
Just as X, so Y
Just as X

Does all the above are correct in GMAT and in all the above both X and Y are independent clauses ?

the last one isn't correct. "just as" is a subordinating construction, so you can't follow it with a clause and nothing else. (it's like "although" or "while" or other such things - since these are subordinating, they have to be attached to some other clause.)

the first two are correct.

i personally don't much like the version with "so" - the "so" always seemed unnecessary to me, since the sentence is perfectly ok without it - but there are sentences in which the added "so" makes the sentence much more readable.

[RonPurewal]

Can someone please tell which grammar rule is broken by option E ?

serious lack of parallelism.

it should be clear, from the context of the sentence, that there needs to be parallelism between the two clauses (both of which describe some sort of special skill set required by somebody).

the second part of the parallel structure (which isn't underlined, and which therefore dictates the form of the underlined part) is of the form "PERSON needs X to do Y".
therefore, the first part should have this structure, or, at the very least, should have a structure that closely approximates this one.

note the essentially perfect parallelism in the correct answer (c).

[vineetbatra]

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

Ron you mentioned that B is fragment and has no verb, isn't needs a verb in B?

[tim]

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

Ron you mentioned that B is fragment and has no verb, isn't needs a verb in B?

In B, "needs" is inside a relative clause and thus cannot be used as the primary verb we require. "An archaeologist who needs X" is not a sentence; you would need to say that an archaeologist who needs X does something..

[tarn07]

just as .... so is idiomatic in C

yes.

just memorize this as a 2-piece parallelism signal. unlike most parallelism signals, though, it requires an independent clause after each part (a relatively unusual construction).

i've always hated this construction, because the more concise "just as ... [nothing] ..." - i.e., the same construction, without the "so" - is also idiomatic. therefore, the "so", in my opinion, is pointlessly wordy, unless it relieves the sentence of some ambiguity.

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

Sorry, I guess I don't understand the use of sentence fragments. Help me understand why the section above (in bold, from answer B) cannot be a sentence fragment? Wouldn't you only need this to be a complete sentence if it was followed by a semi-colon?

Though I understand your logic for "C", I just can't accept that awfully wordy addition of "so"... YUCK, I just don't get how that is appropriate.

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Sorry, I guess I don't understand the use of sentence fragments. Help me understand why the section above (in bold, from answer B) cannot be a sentence fragment? Wouldn't you only need this to be a complete sentence if it was followed by a semi-colon?

Though I understand your logic for "C", I just can't accept that awfully wordy addition of "so"... YUCK, I just don't get how that is appropriate.

Thanks

the way in which you've written this comment (specifically "the use of sentence fragments") makes it seem that you don't really understand what we mean by "sentence fragment".
in particular, there is really no such thing as "the use of sentence fragments", since a "sentence fragment" is by definition something that is INCORRECT.
"sentence fragment" is the name given to a construction that is only part of a sentence, in a context where a complete sentence (independent clause) is required.

in the construction "just as X, so Y", both X and Y must be independent clauses -- i.e., each of them must be a complete sentence if written on its own.
the boldface construction is not a complete sentence by itself -- and it must be, to work in that sort of construction -- so it's a sentence fragment (and therefore incorrect).

[hiphopdidi7623]

Does it mean that after "just as"...we always have to follow independent clause ?

i.e. Just as X, Y
Just as X, so Y
Just as X

Does all the above are correct in GMAT and in all the above both X and Y are independent clauses ?

the last one isn't correct. "just as" is a subordinating construction, so you can't follow it with a clause and nothing else. (it's like "although" or "while" or other such things - since these are subordinating, they have to be attached to some other clause.)

the first two are correct.

i personally don't much like the version with "so" - the "so" always seemed unnecessary to me, since the sentence is perfectly ok without it - but there are sentences in which the added "so" makes the sentence much more readable.

I am still confused with the choice B.
It sounds reasonable to denote the term "a nautical archaeologist" as "an archaeologist".
(Just as X, Y)

What is the real problem with B?

i.e.
Monte Palmer disparages non-technological rural development projects as inhibiting constructive change.

Since, in the ex provided, a direct function as Noun is logical, can this application be available to (Just as X, Y)?

[jnelson0612]

note that (b), which ostensibly uses the more concise construction, is ungrammatical: "an archaeologist who needs a background in art history to evaluate finds of ancient art" is a sentence fragment. it's a subject + modifier, and doesn't have a verb.

In B, "needs" is inside a relative clause and thus cannot be used as the primary verb we require. "An archaeologist who needs X" is not a sentence; you would need to say that an archaeologist who needs X does something..

hiphopdidi, I'm reposting Tim's answer so you can see what is wrong with B. Take a close and careful look at B and C. The difference in B is the addition of the word "who", which breaks parallelism and turns the first part into a sentence fragment.

[hiphopdidi7623]

thank you, nelson

Indeed, I missed something...
I was too focus on the "as" structure to identify the S+V+O structure because I checked this problem to figure out the main purpose (as structure) without any notice to other errors.

I think that is really a lesson I learn from here.

[RonPurewal]

thank you, nelson

Indeed, I missed something...
I was too focus on the "as" structure to identify the S+V+O structure because I checked this problem to figure out the main purpose (as structure) without any notice to other errors.

I think that is really a lesson I learn from here.

glad it helped