Thanks to the entire GMAT ninja team for this top content. I gave my GMAT today and scoring >700 wouldn’t have been possible without the GMAT Ninja videos and GMAT club! You guys are awesome.
Congratulations, Vinni! And thank you so much for the kind words. I'm honored that we could help a little bit. Have fun in grad school, and congratulations again! - Charles
Hi Charles and team, I wanted to thank you from the bottom of my heart for not only your impeccable pedagogical approach, which has helped demystify this very annoying part of the GMAT for so many including me, but also your dedication to providing free content like this that trumps all other GMAT SC content out there. You guys are truly, truly amazing!!!!
Thank you so much for taking the time to write this, Brad! I'm honored that we've been able to help a bit. Have fun studying, and keep us posted on your progress!
If there's anyone reading the comments and wondering whether you should dedicate your time and effort to this series, or whether your SC skills will really improve just by watching some RUclips videos...YES. This series pretty much covers every kind of question that the GMAT can throw at you, and I can't thank the GMAT Ninja team enough. Personal testament: my score in verbal went from 34 to 44, measured just 2 practice tests apart. Watching this series is the best decision you could make, go for it.
Wow that is a huge leap, well done! Was wondering if you could share the other resources you used for the verbal prep? I have watched the entire series but I am still having some difficulties
@jiajue5808 Honestly speaking I just used GMAT Ninja videos along with regular practice from the official guide. So OG questions were my only other resource.
I must say that for the "Baltic Sea" question, finding the four most incorrect answers saved me rather than finding the correct answer. That correct answer still sounds incredibly awkward to me with the second clause starting with "...findings consistent...". But then again, I'm not a native speaker.
That's perfect, Monwabisi! I might have said this in the video, but I completely agree with you: the correct answer sounds really awkward to me, too. That's why we nag students not to rely on "sound" at all -- and to do exactly what you did in your approach to the question. It sounds like you're 100% on the right path with your process.
Hello Charles and team, I just scored 730 on the GMAT(Q47 and V42)!! Thank you from the bottom of my heart, you guys played a very big part in my score. Also, I am aware that 730 is competitive for most top European Business schools, but do you guys think that my relatively low quant score may hurt my chances?
Sorry for my slow response, Mr. Vader. Thank you so much for the kind words, and congratulations on the awesome score! Good news first: generally speaking, European schools are quite a bit less GMAT-obsessed than their American counterparts, and it's really unlikely that anybody in Europe will look at a 730/47Q/42V and say "nah, we need more than that." And now for the bad news: well, there really isn't any, because a 730 is awesome. But my one caveat is that I don't know much about your profile or the specific programs you're applying to. If your academic background is really weak (and non-quantitative), I suppose it's possible that an extra point or two on quant MIGHT help a bit. And if you're applying to quant-specific programs (like an Master's in finance or financial engineering), the threshold on quant might be higher. So I want to be careful not to sound TOO certain here, because I don't know the full story about your background and goals. But in all likelihood, you're in fantastic shape with that score, and if you get rejected anywhere in Europe, it's very unlikely to be the GMAT's fault. :) I hope that helps a bit, and congratulations again!
Just a little update, i plan on taking the exam on the 30th because of an application deadline that's on the 1st of October. I'm not fully prepared but i purchased the GMAT official practice questions 1 which i'm currently using to study and plan on taking the two mock exams before the official exam date. I'll be back with an update after i take the mocks.
Awesome, thank you for the updates, Frederick! Enjoy the ride on the 30th -- at the very very least, you're going to learn a TON from it, even if you decide to retake afterwards. Keep us posted, and have fun studying!
@@jiajue5808 if you check the first video in the quant playlist, I left details but in summary not so good, I scored 580 and plan to take the exam again!
1. Eliminate Definite errors 2. Compare remaining choices, focus on meaning (take it literally) * splits is not a technique * stop using ‘sounds’ * don’t need to worry about grammar jargon! 🎉 *don’t worry about inventing rules
The beginning of another great series! Thank you for producing this! Charles could I check with you whether the placement of "consistent" in the option (E) is a problem? I think that "consistent" modifies the main subject "scientists" and thus it does not make sense--that is my reason to eliminate (E). I am not familiar with the Baltic Sea but I remember some companies do dig oil and gas in the sea so I don't reject the idea "the growth of industrial activities there."
Thank you, Grace! I'm thrilled that you're still with us after 20 weeks of suffering through our videos. :) You have a fair point about industrial activity potentially being "there" in the sea itself -- it's possible, right? But is that a more reasonable meaning than saying that industrial activity occurred "in the area"? I would probably still argue that it's somewhat clearer and more reasonable to say "in the area" instead of just "there." Is "there" absolutely WRONG? Nope, and I definitely wouldn't eliminate (E) on that basis along. But "in the area" gives us at least a slight vote in favor of (D). I agree that "consistent" is pretty darned unclear in (E). What, exactly, is "consistent with the growth of industrial activity"? Is it the Baltic Sea itself (which is the closest noun)? Sediments (which is the next-closest noun)? There's no reason to assume that "consistent" would "reach" way back to modify the subject of the previous clause, and if you read (E) often enough, you'll eventually figure out what the sentence is trying to say. But why not just make it 100% clear by saying "findings consistent"? So I wouldn't argue that (E) is unambiguously WRONG in a vacuum. But both of the differences between (D) and (E) point in the same direction, and (D) is clearly the winner. I hope that helps a bit!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Thank you Charles for producing and providing these sessions online! It is really a pleasure to watch them every Friday, a break from OGs, forums and mock tests. Yes these questions sometimes can give me a hard time, but explanations from you and your team are always helpful and enjoyable. :) I did wonder whether "consistent" in the option (E) should modify the preceding nouns "the Baltic Sea" or "the sediments," but I thought, maybe mistakenly, that this modifier ("consistent with the growth of industrial activity there") works in the same way as do the initial modifiers, which modify whatever comes after (i.e. subjects in most cases.) Perhaps I was wrong--initial modifiers are called "initial" for a good reason. Thank you for your further explanations. Yes I agree that (D) is much clearer. Look forward to the second episode next week! :)
Hey Charles. Great video. Just have one question regarding question 2- When we say that “have yielded strong evidence for…” can be interpreted as for whom? (Or complex societies collecting the evidence) But the same can also be interpreted as evidence for the existence of complex societies. Which is also a framing I’ve read a lot of times in books etc. so how do we disregard this interpretation?
Thank you for the kind words, Navneet! I'm glad that you're enjoying the videos. I'm not sure that I'm interpreting your question correctly, so take the rest of this with a grain of salt. :) In (A), we have the phrase "have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies", and as you suggested, that creates some confusion: are we saying that the societies are acquiring the evidence, or are we saying that the evidence suggests that the societies existed? If we look at it literally, it seems to be saying the former -- if the sentence was trying to say that there's evidence for the existence of the societies, then it should probably include the phrase "the existence of", right? Even if you think that the sentence could be interpreted to mean "evidence for the existence of societies", the phrasing in (A) is at least a little bit confusing. Is it DEFINITELY WRONG? Probably not. But notice that (E) fixes the problem, and when you compare (A) and (E) side-by-side, (E) is clearer and avoids any potential misinterpretation. I hope that helps!
Thanks for the video! I had eliminated C & D on the basis of Parallelism. "simultanously with and independently of" "with" is missing in choices C &D. Is this though process correct?
On one hand, sure: I don't think (C) or (D) make any sense when the word "with" is omitted. So your thought process is fundamentally correct on one level. Just keep in mind that on your first pass through a sentence correction question, your goal is to start with the easiest ways to eliminate answer choices. If you're 100% certain about something like the missing preposition, great -- you can go ahead and cross those out. But personally, I'd prefer to start with the subject-verb error here, partly because evaluating a missing preposition can become subjective pretty quickly, depending on the exact circumstances, and it might take some time to fully evaluate whether the sentence is definitively wrong without the preposition. To maximize efficiency, I usually worry about that sort of thing only after I've tackled the lowest-hanging fruit in the question. But again, there's no harm in making the elimination quickly because of a preposition issue if (1) you're certain about it, and (2) you're confident that it's the fastest way to eliminate those answer choices. I hope that helps a bit!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring thank you so much! The Quant and Verbal series have both been an absolute blessing to my GMAT prep, i finally scheduled to give the exam on 25th :)
Do you have a video where you have tips for how to do this process with the gmat note pad? I love this process for approaching SC but I’m struggling with how to translate this in the live situation where I can’t mark up the question, circle decision points/ put +\- symbols for noting if a answer options has a point in it’s favor. Currently I feel my best bet is to quickly right down ABCDE, and then rarely look away from the screen. Only doing so to cross out answer options or put a plus or minus for a vote in favor of an option. Again overall great, on my most recent 2 gmat practice tests using this approach I shifted from averaging 5 SC wrong to only 1 or 2 wrong, I just feel like for the ones I got wrong I lost track of those tiny details.
I think that general approach sounds about right. Personally, I always just write "ABCDE" on my page when I'm doing SC (or any other verbal question), and then cross things out only if I know they're wrong. If I'm not sure that an answer choice is wrong, I just leave it there -- I don't bother with anything more complicated, like plusses or minuses or question marks or smiley faces. So don't overthink it. What you're doing on your white board sounds like it's probably fine. I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
Very soon! We have one last RC video premiering this Friday (Oct. 14, 2022), and then the CR series will start on the 21st. The series is a bit unconventional, but hopefully helpful. Enjoy!
One question, I am just starting prep for GMAT. So this series is sufficient with all grammar and learnings. Or i need to go through first and see this series ?
The video series should cover everything you really need for SC. I don't want to pretend that you'll magically ace everything after watching all 18 videos, but we cover every major principle that you'll see on GMAT or EA SC questions. It's just a question of how much practice you might need in addition to the videos. I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
Hi. Many thanks for this, it’s super useful! One question I had was regarding C. The reason given is the use of ‘its’, and not making sense in modifying Baltic Sea. But to me it makes complete sense if it’s referring to Baltic Sea, since you can have Baltic seas growth of industrial activity! Ie oil and gas. So I’m not sure why we can eliminate it on this basis. I do however think it is less clear in general than option D. Even though you mention its can only refer to Baltic Sea due it being singular, I think it is less clear than d still. Would this line of reasoning work?
Good question, Rez! If I'm understanding you correctly, I think you're suggesting that (C) isn't TOTALLY illogical, right? Here's (C) again, punched into the full sentence: "Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with ITS growth of industrial activity." Sure, I suppose it's conceivable that there's industrial activity IN the sea itself, as you suggested. I might argue that it's weird to use a possessive construction in this situation ("the Baltic Sea's growth of industrial activity"), but maybe it's not definitively WRONG to do so. It might be fair to say that (C) shouldn't be automatically eliminated because of that construction -- and that's not an unreasonable stance at all. But you're spot-on about the rest of it. (D) is soooooo much clearer. With (C), we're left wondering: "Wait, the industrial growth is IN the sea itself? And it BELONGS to the sea in some way? I guess that might make sense...?" In (D), the meaning is completely clear, so it's better than (C). Keep in mind that SC asks you to pick the BEST of five answer choices. So that means that the right answer isn't always perfect, and the incorrect answers aren't always completely heinous. As long as you're clear that (D) is better than (C), you're 100% on track. I hope that helps!
Thank you for the videos! Could you please help me understand why "the first trenches cut...." (Q2, option E) is not an issue (or, not a bigger issue than the others)? Doesn't it make it seem that the 'trenches' are 'cutting' a 500-acre site?
I understand what you're saying: if we look at that opening phrase ("the first trenches cut") in a vacuum, "cut" could be either a verb (meaning that the trenches themselves are doing the cutting) or an adjective (we're just describing the trenches, which were "cut into" a particular site). In theory, that's confusing, I suppose. Whenever you see something potentially confusing on an EA or GMAT SC question, you want to ask yourself: does this REALLY cause a problem? In this case, I would probably argue that there's not much of an issue. The overall structure of (E) makes perfect sense if you interpret "cut" as an adjective: "The first trenches cut... have yielded..." No problem there, right? We're saying that a certain subset of the trenches (the ones cut into the 500-acre site) have yielded some interesting evidence. Obviously, that same sentence becomes a nightmare if you instead assume that "cut" is a verb -- the meaning doesn't make sense, and you then you have all sorts of structural problems, since it looks like the sentence has two main verbs, and that's clearly not cool. At this point, you have two choices: (1) you could accept that "cut" works fine as an adjective and move on to other issues, or (2) drive yourself nuts worrying about what happens if you assume that "cut" is a verb. In this case, there's a completely reasonable interpretation of the word "cut" as an adjective, and you're much better off moving on to other issues. More broadly, whenever you encounter something that's potentially a problem, but also has a completely reasonable interpretation, you're probably better off worrying about other issues. There are plenty of other decision points in this particular question that are more worthy of your time and attention. Thank you for the question, and I hope that helps a bit!
Hi Charles. Thanks for the video. I have a query regarding choices C and E in the second question of the video. I understand the differences explained, however, there is another difference in the choices, i.e., "but also" vs. "but" at the end of choices C and E respectively. Can you please explain this difference? Also, can we use "but also," in sentences without "not only"?
I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about the presence or absence of "only", partly because there are almost always more important things to worry about in GMAT SC questions (including this one). It's also a pretty subtle distinction that's unlikely to be a deciding factor. "Also" just means "in addition to" or "too", and when we use it, we're generally trying to emphasize some sort of pairing. For example: "I regularly exercise and I also eat like a starving, maniacal pig." Do I really need to use "also" there? Not really -- it's just a stylistic choice. But "also" is totally acceptable there, since I do those two activities. In the Tell Hamoukar trenches question, I don't love the use of "also" in (B) and (D), but I wouldn't overreact to it, or conclude that it's WRONG, exactly. The sentence is trying to emphasize a contrast (two things arose "simultaneously... but independently"), and I don't think there's a great reason to use "also" there. But again, I wouldn't argue that it's automatically wrong, and I would move on to other issues quickly. Similarly, it's not usually a good idea to try to boil GMAT SC down to rigid rules around things like "but also." When you see a construction with a "not" and a "but" in it, you probably need to think about parallelism (more on that here: ruclips.net/video/z0JKKw8z2II/видео.html). But we can definitely use "but also" without a "not only." For example: "He eats like a starving, maniacal pig, but also has the physique of a breadstick." That's fine, though it would also be fine without the "also". ;) I hope that helps!
Thanks to the entire GMAT ninja team for this top content. I gave my GMAT today and scoring >700 wouldn’t have been possible without the GMAT Ninja videos and GMAT club! You guys are awesome.
Congratulations, Vinni! And thank you so much for the kind words. I'm honored that we could help a little bit.
Have fun in grad school, and congratulations again!
- Charles
Thank you Adam Sandler!
Haha, thank you!
Hi Charles and team, I wanted to thank you from the bottom of my heart for not only your impeccable pedagogical approach, which has helped demystify this very annoying part of the GMAT for so many including me, but also your dedication to providing free content like this that trumps all other GMAT SC content out there. You guys are truly, truly amazing!!!!
Thank you so much for taking the time to write this, Brad! I'm honored that we've been able to help a bit. Have fun studying, and keep us posted on your progress!
If there's anyone reading the comments and wondering whether you should dedicate your time and effort to this series, or whether your SC skills will really improve just by watching some RUclips videos...YES. This series pretty much covers every kind of question that the GMAT can throw at you, and I can't thank the GMAT Ninja team enough. Personal testament: my score in verbal went from 34 to 44, measured just 2 practice tests apart. Watching this series is the best decision you could make, go for it.
Wow that is a huge leap, well done! Was wondering if you could share the other resources you used for the verbal prep? I have watched the entire series but I am still having some difficulties
@jiajue5808 Honestly speaking I just used GMAT Ninja videos along with regular practice from the official guide. So OG questions were my only other resource.
Thanks a lot for this series. Absolutely love your teaching methodology and clarity in explanations.
Thank you so much for the kind words, Ashutosh! I'm glad that we can help a bit. - Charles
I must say that for the "Baltic Sea" question, finding the four most incorrect answers saved me rather than finding the correct answer. That correct answer still sounds incredibly awkward to me with the second clause starting with "...findings consistent...". But then again, I'm not a native speaker.
That's perfect, Monwabisi! I might have said this in the video, but I completely agree with you: the correct answer sounds really awkward to me, too. That's why we nag students not to rely on "sound" at all -- and to do exactly what you did in your approach to the question. It sounds like you're 100% on the right path with your process.
Hello Charles and team, I just scored 730 on the GMAT(Q47 and V42)!! Thank you from the bottom of my heart, you guys played a very big part in my score.
Also, I am aware that 730 is competitive for most top European Business schools, but do you guys think that my relatively low quant score may hurt my chances?
Sorry for my slow response, Mr. Vader. Thank you so much for the kind words, and congratulations on the awesome score!
Good news first: generally speaking, European schools are quite a bit less GMAT-obsessed than their American counterparts, and it's really unlikely that anybody in Europe will look at a 730/47Q/42V and say "nah, we need more than that."
And now for the bad news: well, there really isn't any, because a 730 is awesome. But my one caveat is that I don't know much about your profile or the specific programs you're applying to. If your academic background is really weak (and non-quantitative), I suppose it's possible that an extra point or two on quant MIGHT help a bit. And if you're applying to quant-specific programs (like an Master's in finance or financial engineering), the threshold on quant might be higher.
So I want to be careful not to sound TOO certain here, because I don't know the full story about your background and goals. But in all likelihood, you're in fantastic shape with that score, and if you get rejected anywhere in Europe, it's very unlikely to be the GMAT's fault. :)
I hope that helps a bit, and congratulations again!
Just a little update, i plan on taking the exam on the 30th because of an application deadline that's on the 1st of October. I'm not fully prepared but i purchased the GMAT official practice questions 1 which i'm currently using to study and plan on taking the two mock exams before the official exam date. I'll be back with an update after i take the mocks.
Awesome, thank you for the updates, Frederick! Enjoy the ride on the 30th -- at the very very least, you're going to learn a TON from it, even if you decide to retake afterwards. Keep us posted, and have fun studying!
how did you do!
@@jiajue5808 if you check the first video in the quant playlist, I left details but in summary not so good, I scored 580 and plan to take the exam again!
Thanks a million ton for making this video series
Truly grateful beyond words
Thank you so much, Shivansh! Glad that we could help a bit.
1. Eliminate Definite errors
2. Compare remaining choices, focus on meaning (take it literally)
* splits is not a technique
* stop using ‘sounds’
* don’t need to worry about grammar jargon! 🎉
*don’t worry about inventing rules
The beginning of another great series! Thank you for producing this!
Charles could I check with you whether the placement of "consistent" in the option (E) is a problem? I think that "consistent" modifies the main subject "scientists" and thus it does not make sense--that is my reason to eliminate (E). I am not familiar with the Baltic Sea but I remember some companies do dig oil and gas in the sea so I don't reject the idea "the growth of industrial activities there."
Thank you, Grace! I'm thrilled that you're still with us after 20 weeks of suffering through our videos. :)
You have a fair point about industrial activity potentially being "there" in the sea itself -- it's possible, right? But is that a more reasonable meaning than saying that industrial activity occurred "in the area"? I would probably still argue that it's somewhat clearer and more reasonable to say "in the area" instead of just "there."
Is "there" absolutely WRONG? Nope, and I definitely wouldn't eliminate (E) on that basis along. But "in the area" gives us at least a slight vote in favor of (D).
I agree that "consistent" is pretty darned unclear in (E). What, exactly, is "consistent with the growth of industrial activity"? Is it the Baltic Sea itself (which is the closest noun)? Sediments (which is the next-closest noun)?
There's no reason to assume that "consistent" would "reach" way back to modify the subject of the previous clause, and if you read (E) often enough, you'll eventually figure out what the sentence is trying to say. But why not just make it 100% clear by saying "findings consistent"?
So I wouldn't argue that (E) is unambiguously WRONG in a vacuum. But both of the differences between (D) and (E) point in the same direction, and (D) is clearly the winner.
I hope that helps a bit!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Thank you Charles for producing and providing these sessions online! It is really a pleasure to watch them every Friday, a break from OGs, forums and mock tests. Yes these questions sometimes can give me a hard time, but explanations from you and your team are always helpful and enjoyable. :)
I did wonder whether "consistent" in the option (E) should modify the preceding nouns "the Baltic Sea" or "the sediments," but I thought, maybe mistakenly, that this modifier ("consistent with the growth of industrial activity there") works in the same way as do the initial modifiers, which modify whatever comes after (i.e. subjects in most cases.) Perhaps I was wrong--initial modifiers are called "initial" for a good reason. Thank you for your further explanations. Yes I agree that (D) is much clearer.
Look forward to the second episode next week! :)
Great video and very clean approach to problem solving by eliminating the wrong options first.
Thank you so much for the kind words, Prashant. Have fun studying!
Thank you for your time Charles
Thank you, Manuel! Have fun studying.
You're a genius man. Thank you so much
Aw, you're too kind. Thank you so much for the warm comment -- it's very much appreciated, as always. Have fun studying!
- Charles
Hey Charles. Great video. Just have one question regarding question 2-
When we say that “have yielded strong evidence for…” can be interpreted as for whom? (Or complex societies collecting the evidence)
But the same can also be interpreted as evidence for the existence of complex societies. Which is also a framing I’ve read a lot of times in books etc. so how do we disregard this interpretation?
Thank you for the kind words, Navneet! I'm glad that you're enjoying the videos.
I'm not sure that I'm interpreting your question correctly, so take the rest of this with a grain of salt. :)
In (A), we have the phrase "have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies", and as you suggested, that creates some confusion: are we saying that the societies are acquiring the evidence, or are we saying that the evidence suggests that the societies existed?
If we look at it literally, it seems to be saying the former -- if the sentence was trying to say that there's evidence for the existence of the societies, then it should probably include the phrase "the existence of", right?
Even if you think that the sentence could be interpreted to mean "evidence for the existence of societies", the phrasing in (A) is at least a little bit confusing. Is it DEFINITELY WRONG? Probably not. But notice that (E) fixes the problem, and when you compare (A) and (E) side-by-side, (E) is clearer and avoids any potential misinterpretation.
I hope that helps!
god bless you for this channel and its content
Thank you so much. Have fun studying!
Thanks for the video!
I had eliminated C & D on the basis of Parallelism.
"simultanously with and independently of"
"with" is missing in choices C &D. Is this though process correct?
On one hand, sure: I don't think (C) or (D) make any sense when the word "with" is omitted. So your thought process is fundamentally correct on one level.
Just keep in mind that on your first pass through a sentence correction question, your goal is to start with the easiest ways to eliminate answer choices. If you're 100% certain about something like the missing preposition, great -- you can go ahead and cross those out.
But personally, I'd prefer to start with the subject-verb error here, partly because evaluating a missing preposition can become subjective pretty quickly, depending on the exact circumstances, and it might take some time to fully evaluate whether the sentence is definitively wrong without the preposition. To maximize efficiency, I usually worry about that sort of thing only after I've tackled the lowest-hanging fruit in the question.
But again, there's no harm in making the elimination quickly because of a preposition issue if (1) you're certain about it, and (2) you're confident that it's the fastest way to eliminate those answer choices.
I hope that helps a bit!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring thank you so much! The Quant and Verbal series have both been an absolute blessing to my GMAT prep, i finally scheduled to give the exam on 25th :)
@@vidhi1610 All the best Vidhi. You'll nail it :)
Got both the questions right !
Do you have a video where you have tips for how to do this process with the gmat note pad? I love this process for approaching SC but I’m struggling with how to translate this in the live situation where I can’t mark up the question, circle decision points/ put +\- symbols for noting if a answer options has a point in it’s favor.
Currently I feel my best bet is to quickly right down ABCDE, and then rarely look away from the screen. Only doing so to cross out answer options or put a plus or minus for a vote in favor of an option.
Again overall great, on my most recent 2 gmat practice tests using this approach I shifted from averaging 5 SC wrong to only 1 or 2 wrong, I just feel like for the ones I got wrong I lost track of those tiny details.
I think that general approach sounds about right. Personally, I always just write "ABCDE" on my page when I'm doing SC (or any other verbal question), and then cross things out only if I know they're wrong. If I'm not sure that an answer choice is wrong, I just leave it there -- I don't bother with anything more complicated, like plusses or minuses or question marks or smiley faces.
So don't overthink it. What you're doing on your white board sounds like it's probably fine.
I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
AMAZING VIDEO
Thank you so much!
Hi sir
When will the Cr series will start on this channel
Very soon! We have one last RC video premiering this Friday (Oct. 14, 2022), and then the CR series will start on the 21st. The series is a bit unconventional, but hopefully helpful. Enjoy!
One question,
I am just starting prep for GMAT.
So this series is sufficient with all grammar and learnings.
Or i need to go through first and see this series ?
The video series should cover everything you really need for SC. I don't want to pretend that you'll magically ace everything after watching all 18 videos, but we cover every major principle that you'll see on GMAT or EA SC questions. It's just a question of how much practice you might need in addition to the videos.
I hope that helps a bit, and have fun studying!
This is such great and useful content!! Thank you so much!!
Thank you so much for taking the time to leave such a lovely comment! I'm glad that we can help a bit. Have fun studying, @Sushrutha!
Hi. Many thanks for this, it’s super useful!
One question I had was regarding C. The reason given is the use of ‘its’, and not making sense in modifying Baltic Sea. But to me it makes complete sense if it’s referring to Baltic Sea, since you can have Baltic seas growth of industrial activity! Ie oil and gas. So I’m not sure why we can eliminate it on this basis.
I do however think it is less clear in general than option D. Even though you mention its can only refer to Baltic Sea due it being singular, I think it is less clear than d still.
Would this line of reasoning work?
Good question, Rez! If I'm understanding you correctly, I think you're suggesting that (C) isn't TOTALLY illogical, right? Here's (C) again, punched into the full sentence:
"Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with ITS growth of industrial activity."
Sure, I suppose it's conceivable that there's industrial activity IN the sea itself, as you suggested. I might argue that it's weird to use a possessive construction in this situation ("the Baltic Sea's growth of industrial activity"), but maybe it's not definitively WRONG to do so. It might be fair to say that (C) shouldn't be automatically eliminated because of that construction -- and that's not an unreasonable stance at all.
But you're spot-on about the rest of it. (D) is soooooo much clearer. With (C), we're left wondering: "Wait, the industrial growth is IN the sea itself? And it BELONGS to the sea in some way? I guess that might make sense...?" In (D), the meaning is completely clear, so it's better than (C).
Keep in mind that SC asks you to pick the BEST of five answer choices. So that means that the right answer isn't always perfect, and the incorrect answers aren't always completely heinous. As long as you're clear that (D) is better than (C), you're 100% on track.
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring great, many thanks, much appreciated!
very very useful
Thank you, Jack!
Thank you for the videos!
Could you please help me understand why "the first trenches cut...." (Q2, option E) is not an issue (or, not a bigger issue than the others)? Doesn't it make it seem that the 'trenches' are 'cutting' a 500-acre site?
I understand what you're saying: if we look at that opening phrase ("the first trenches cut") in a vacuum, "cut" could be either a verb (meaning that the trenches themselves are doing the cutting) or an adjective (we're just describing the trenches, which were "cut into" a particular site). In theory, that's confusing, I suppose.
Whenever you see something potentially confusing on an EA or GMAT SC question, you want to ask yourself: does this REALLY cause a problem? In this case, I would probably argue that there's not much of an issue.
The overall structure of (E) makes perfect sense if you interpret "cut" as an adjective: "The first trenches cut... have yielded..." No problem there, right? We're saying that a certain subset of the trenches (the ones cut into the 500-acre site) have yielded some interesting evidence.
Obviously, that same sentence becomes a nightmare if you instead assume that "cut" is a verb -- the meaning doesn't make sense, and you then you have all sorts of structural problems, since it looks like the sentence has two main verbs, and that's clearly not cool.
At this point, you have two choices: (1) you could accept that "cut" works fine as an adjective and move on to other issues, or (2) drive yourself nuts worrying about what happens if you assume that "cut" is a verb. In this case, there's a completely reasonable interpretation of the word "cut" as an adjective, and you're much better off moving on to other issues.
More broadly, whenever you encounter something that's potentially a problem, but also has a completely reasonable interpretation, you're probably better off worrying about other issues. There are plenty of other decision points in this particular question that are more worthy of your time and attention.
Thank you for the question, and I hope that helps a bit!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Thanks a ton for the explanation! That helps a lot :)
Hi Charles. Thanks for the video.
I have a query regarding choices C and E in the second question of the video. I understand the differences explained, however, there is another difference in the choices, i.e., "but also" vs. "but" at the end of choices C and E respectively. Can you please explain this difference? Also, can we use "but also," in sentences without "not only"?
I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about the presence or absence of "only", partly because there are almost always more important things to worry about in GMAT SC questions (including this one). It's also a pretty subtle distinction that's unlikely to be a deciding factor.
"Also" just means "in addition to" or "too", and when we use it, we're generally trying to emphasize some sort of pairing. For example: "I regularly exercise and I also eat like a starving, maniacal pig." Do I really need to use "also" there? Not really -- it's just a stylistic choice. But "also" is totally acceptable there, since I do those two activities.
In the Tell Hamoukar trenches question, I don't love the use of "also" in (B) and (D), but I wouldn't overreact to it, or conclude that it's WRONG, exactly. The sentence is trying to emphasize a contrast (two things arose "simultaneously... but independently"), and I don't think there's a great reason to use "also" there. But again, I wouldn't argue that it's automatically wrong, and I would move on to other issues quickly.
Similarly, it's not usually a good idea to try to boil GMAT SC down to rigid rules around things like "but also." When you see a construction with a "not" and a "but" in it, you probably need to think about parallelism (more on that here: ruclips.net/video/z0JKKw8z2II/видео.html). But we can definitely use "but also" without a "not only." For example: "He eats like a starving, maniacal pig, but also has the physique of a breadstick." That's fine, though it would also be fine without the "also". ;)
I hope that helps!
@@GMATNinjaTutoring Ah! Understood, thank you so much for the detailed explanation.
with seeing evidence that, we can go for E?
The non-posessive pronoun can't refer to posessive antecedent, but can posessive pronoun refer to non-posessive antecedent
Im more confused after watching this