GMAT Prep SC1: Broccoli thrives in moderate to cool climates

[MafiaMa710]

Broccoli thrives in moderate to cool climates and propagated by seeds, either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed for producing transplants.

(A) propagated by seeds, either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed for producing
(B) propagated by seeds, sown either directly in the field or sown in plant beds designed so as to produce
(C) is propagated by seeds either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed so that they produce
(D) is propagated by seeds sown either directly in the field or in plant beds designed to produce
(E) is propagated by seeds, sown either directly in the field or sown in plant beds designed for producing

The OA for this problem was (D) but I don't understand how "thrives" and "is propagated" is parallel. Isn't "thrives" in present tense and "is propagated" past participle. Seems to me like "is" also ruins the parellelism.

[RonPurewal]

Broccoli thrives in moderate to cool climates and propagated by seeds, either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed for producing transplants.

(A) propagated by seeds, either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed for producing
(B) propagated by seeds, sown either directly in the field or sown in plant beds designed so as to produce
(C) is propagated by seeds either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed so that they produce
(D) is propagated by seeds sown either directly in the field or in plant beds designed to produce
(E) is propagated by seeds, sown either directly in the field or sown in plant beds designed for producing

The OA for this problem was (D) but I don't understand how "thrives" and "is propagated" is parallel. Isn't "thrives" in present tense and "is propagated" past participle. Seems to me like "is" also ruins the parellelism.

these are both present tense verbs.
"thrives" is in the active voice, and "is propagated" is in the passive voice, but such voice shifts are not uncommon; the tense, as required by context, does not shift.

if you say just "propagated", then there is actually no verb at all.
the appearance of "BY seeds", afterward, signifies that "propagated" is actually a past participle (i.e., a passive voice construction), and not a verb.

--

by the way, the word and does not always require perfect parallelism of verb tenses, either. here's a very simple example of a sentence in which "and" connects 2 verbs of different tenses:
we have won every game so far and will continue to win the rest of the games.

in this sentence, the context clearly dictates that the two verbs be in different tenses, so it would be unreasonable to stipulate parallelism of tenses in this case.

[prashantb03]

Hi ron,

Have I missed anything or is any one of the below mentioned errors actually not an error?

In my opinion, there are many errors such as

1. co-ordinating conjunction such as "and" needs a clause, so "is " is required , elminating A and B

2. idioms "either -or" with parallelism-only "D" shows parallelism in idiomatic usage

3. So as to in Option B is not iditiomatic

4. comma after seeds in A and B is incorectly used, it does not modify anthing

5. "They" in c is an ambigious pronoun

6. in E-designed for producing looks awkward

[RonPurewal]

1. co-ordinating conjunction such as "and" needs a clause, so "is " is required , elminating A and B

no, "and" definitely doesn't ALWAYS require a clause. it just requires parallel structures.
for instance, there is definitely nothing wrong with the following sentences, even though "and" doesn't separate entire clauses:
i ate pecans and almonds.
there were ants in the cupboards and on the counters.

the problem with "...and propagated by seeds" is that there's [i]nothing in the first part that could be parallel to "propagated" (a participle, which functions as an adjective --> there is no adjectival construction on the left).

for instance, if you wrote
Broccoli is grown in moderate to cool climates and propagated by seeds
then you'd be fine.

2. idioms "either -or" with parallelism-only "D" shows parallelism in idiomatic usage

yes.

well done.

this routine observation of parallelism is actually all that is needed to solve the ENTIRE PROBLEM.

it's good to go after two-part signals, such as "either/or" or "both/and", BEFORE other instances of parallelism, since they are easier to evaluate.

3. So as to in Option B is not iditiomatic

i haven't seen "so as to" in a correct answer, but i wouldn't immediately dismiss it as incorrect.

4. comma after seeds in A and B is incorectly used, it does not modify anthing

not sure about that - it could still modify "seeds" (as in the later choices).

the difference is mostly rhetorical - nonessential vs. essential modifier. that's not a difference large enough to form the basis for a reliable judgment.

5. "They" in c is an ambigious pronoun

agreed

remember that some ambiguous pronouns are just fine - in fact, lots of ambiguous pronouns are acceptable, if the context is sufficiently clear - but this context is anything but clear.

6. in E-designed for producing looks awkward

possibly. that may or may not be ok.

[eggpain24]

sorry for bumping the old thread

I notice that in choice C

is propagated by seeds either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed so that they produce

is this “so that” creating somewhat weird meaning？

sth. is propagated by seeds either sown directly in the field or in plant beds designed → （intended to have a result：plant beds produce sth.)

I think the meaning is better in the correct choice by showing that the purpose of plant beds is to produce sth.

[RonPurewal]

You're correct.

"Designed so that..." seems to suggest that the design itself is arbitrary and unimportant—i.e., that only the fact that they are designed (and not, say, totally random) matters.

If that's the idea that you're trying to convey with your parentheses, then it's totally on point.

Nicely done.

[eggpain24]

You're correct.

"Designed so that..." seems to suggest that the design itself is arbitrary and unimportant—i.e., that only the fact that they are designed (and not, say, totally random) matters.

If that's the idea that you're trying to convey with your parentheses, then it's totally on point.

Nicely done.

that's exactly what I mean. Thanks for clarification!

[RonPurewal]

Cool.

Interestingly, broccoli is not a natural species. The Italians invented it.
Pretty neat, huh.

[mehmetserek]

Hi Ron,
I recall from a previous GMATPrep problem(Both weakened by concern about the government`s agreement...) that the inclusion of additional modifiers/adjectives/adverbs does not affect parallelism.
In this example parallel elements are "in the field" and "in plant beds".
"directly" is an adverb and does not affect parallelism.
Is that correct understanding?
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

absolutely perfect understanding.