Question
Turtles, like other reptiles, can endure long fasts, in their ability to survive on weekly or even monthly feedings; however, when food is readily available, they may eat frequently and grow very fat.
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Option E
(This question is from Official Guide. Therefore, because of copyrights, the complete question cannot be copied here. The question can be accessed at GMAT Club)
Solution
Sentence Analysis
The original sentence is unclear regarding the relationship that “in their ability to survive” has with the remaining sentence. The phrase seems incorrectly worded: “Turtles can endure long fasts in their ability…” doesn’t make much sense.
The independent clause after the semi-colon says that when food is available, the turtles may eat frequently and thus grow very fat.
The sentence has one error: the use of “in their ability…”.
Option Analysis
(A) Incorrect. For the reason mentioned above.
(B) Incorrect. “their” is redundant since it is obvious that they have their own ability! Also, this option doesn’t express the meaning (causality) as clearly as option D. Since we have to choose one option among the give five, option D scores over this option.
(C) Incorrect. “ability of surviving” is non-idiomatic. The correct idiom is “ability to verb” i.e. “ability to survive” in this case.
The debate around whether ‘due to’ can modify a verb has been discussed in this article.
(D) Correct. The option clearly expresses the causality.
(E) Incorrect. “ability of surviving” is non-idiomatic. Even if we correct this error, option D is clearer than this option.
Discover more from GMAT with CJ
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hi CJ!
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
I had a doubt in Option B (meaning aspect prolly).
If Verb-ing is used after a clause and preceded with a comma, it essentially shows the outcome or answers the “how” aspect of the preceding clause. There can be other uses as well I understand.
In this question, turtle endure long fasts and the phrase following Verb-ing (having) answers the “how” aspect of the preceding clause.
Hence if the option was reframed as – fasts, having “the” ability to survive – would there still be a causality error?
Thank you
As I mentioned in the solution, D is just clearer, even though B can communicate causality. If we make the change as you suggest, B would become clearer.
Leave a comment