Patience Lovell Wright, whose traveling waxworks exhibit

[jlucero]

"well known as much because of having an eccentric personality as for having skillfully rendered popular public figures in wax "

Ron, in the above sentence... if we replace 'for' with 'because of', then is the parallelism error corrected?

If not please explain how to correct the parallelism.
My problem is, I can correct the parallelism if we have single and two-word parallelism markers such as 'and' , 'either.. or...'.
But I'm having problem with parallelism markers such as 'as much as', 'as good as'. Please help me understand it.

This is an option the GMAT probably wouldn't give you b/c of the very hard-to-explain idiom. I can't explain the difference in the two idioms, but do note that the GMAT is trying to make this sort of issue less prevalent on the test, so be happy about that.

[aditya8062]

Good Day Ron
kindly tell me if the following construction legit :Patience Lovell Wright became well known as much for X as for Y.

according to jlucero (in the thread above ) this is correct but according to you this sentence has some redundancy issue . if this sentence has redundancy then kindly tell me how

[RonPurewal]

Good Day Ron
kindly tell me if the following construction legit :Patience Lovell Wright became well known as much for X as for Y.

according to jlucero (in the thread above ) this is correct but according to you this sentence has some redundancy issue . if this sentence has redundancy then kindly tell me how

This sentence would be correct, because "well known" is separate from "as much".

I was describing the redundancy that would ensue from using both "well" AND "much" in the same construction.
E.g.,
My T-shirts are not as well worn as yours. (correct)
My T-shirts have not been worn as much as yours. (correct)
*My T-shirts have not been well worn as much as yours. (redundant)

Apologies if that was unclear.

[benjamindian]

Hi Ron,

Just want to make sure one thing:

You once said: you can never say "because of VERBing" unless the -Ving is a gerund. (Source: due-to-poaching-and-increased-cultivation-t2368.html)

But every -ing verb, even "being + past participle" (such as the example below), can be used as a gerund, so what does that rule exactly mean?

Simply being genetically engineered does not make a plant any more likely to xxxxxx.

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

i don't remember what a "gerund" is, but, from the context here, i'm guessing it means "__ing noun". (if this is wrong, then none of the following is relevant.)

But every -ing verb, even "being + past participle" (such as the example below), can be used as a gerund, so what does that rule exactly mean?

Simply being genetically engineered does not make a plant any more likely to xxxxxx.

Thanks!

it's true that every __ing form CAN be a noun... but that most certainly does not mean that every __ing form IS always a noun.

(__ing modifiers, which are tested far more often, are not nouns; they're modifiers that generally play the role of either an adjective or an adverb.)

[RonPurewal]

stupid analogy: i have a bunch of folding chairs.

clearly, every single chair CAN be folded up flat. (they're folding chairs, after all.)
on the other hand, the answer to "IS this chair folded up flat?" is not always yes.

i think you get the point.

[mikalaisin]

Hi Ron,
thanks for great explanations, but i have a small doubt.
While picking the right choice, i ended up with B and E.
E- i didn't like because of bad parallelism
as well known for her eccentric personality as (???) for her skillful wax renderings of popular public figures.
I thought that idiom as ....as should have parallel structure similar to Both to, meaning that if there is well known after 1st AS, then it should be well known after 2nd AS.

Can you please explain why this is not the case here?

[RonPurewal]

you're doing what you shouldn't be doing.
specifically, you're trying to learn to write comparison sentences.

i wrote a warning about this here:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p113659

really, don't do it.

[RonPurewal]

when you see this sort of thing tested, this is all you generally need to do:
* find the second part of the comparison (after the signal)
* figure out what the first thing should be (to create parallelism)
* see if it's there

E:
the second thing (after 'as') is for her skillful wax renderings of popular public figures.
for + THING
...so the first thing should be for her eccentric personality.
this exact construction is there.

B:
the second thing (after 'as') is for skillful wax renderings of popular public figures.
for + THING
...so the first thing should be for her eccentric personality.
this isn't there. instead we have "for + verbING".

E = clear winner, B = clear loser.

[RichaChampion]

choice b exhibits poor parallelism:
having an eccentric personality is placed in parallel with skilful wax renderings....

choice e exhibits proper parallelism, in that both of the parallel items are noun phrases (the principal nouns being personality and renderings).


--

oh, and by the way, it's tussaud (not 'tuscan').

Ron Sir,

I believe here the ||'sm is
as much X as Y

X = because of having an eccentric personality
The words “because of” are a compound preposition. Prepositions are designed to be followed by only a noun —- “because of the rain“, “because of the parade“, “because of the child’s temper tantrum“, etc. The object of this or any preposition can be a gerund or gerund phrase —- “because of waiting for the senator“, “because of limited parking“, “because of having eaten out every night this week“, etc.

Y = for having skillfully rendered popular public figures in wax

X and Y both are prepositional phrases so therefore they are indeed parallel.

N.B I am talking about Option A

Sometimes we belive that our post is posted in a wrong thread, but we do not find any option to delete the post.

[RonPurewal]

i'm sorry, but i can't tell what you are trying to ask.

[aflaamM589]

Hello Experts,
A can also be crossed because of because of Ving, correct?
Thanks in anticipation

[RonPurewal]

yes.

[AnirbanM72]

yes.

Hi Ron, can you kindly explain why is option a not correct?
I chose option a based on below understanding
X = because of having an eccentric personality
The words “because of” are a compound preposition. Prepositions are designed to be followed by only a noun —- “because of the rain“, “because of the parade“, “because of the child’s temper tantrum“, etc. The object of this or any preposition can be a gerund or gerund phrase —- “because of waiting for the senator“, “because of limited parking“, “because of having eaten out every night this week“, etc.

Y = for having skillfully rendered popular public figures in wax

X and Y both are prepositional phrases so therefore they are indeed parallel.

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

Sure, both parts of the sentence contain prepositions, but you can probably feel that 'for... and for ...' is better parallelism.

For another approach, you can eliminate answer A on the grounds that 'well known because of having' is an incorrect idiom. Using a gerund here obscures the meaning: it makes it unclear who has the eccentric personality.