please read the thread; every single one of these issues is already addressed on the first page of the thread.

Hi Ron/Stacy,

I still don't get the difference between "to be" and "is" here, could you give more explanation? Thank you very much!

this is not an inherent difference between “to be” and “is”; the difference is idiomatic and is based on the usage of “claim”.

"claim to be" is only used when the person making the claim is talking about him/herself.
i.e.,
my five-year-old brother james claims to be the principal conductor of the boston symphony orchestra --> correct, because james is talking about himself.

I see. Thank you! very clear explanation!

good stuff

Hmm...at first I think I got what it means. But then I came across this problem. It's from early GMAT paper test.

[deleted]

sorry ruoxueshe, GMAT paper tests are banned on this forum. please read the forum rules (at the top of every folder) before you post; the banned sources are all explicitly listed.

Hi,

Is this comparison correct or ambiguous in wrong options A and E ?

, the length of which is that of a handheld computer ,

I interpreted this to mean that the same "physical length" is being attached to both the entities. Correctly it should mean that they have a "length value" that is common.

i think it's technically fine, but it's awful -- if you see it, it will always be alongside a more compact, better version, such as "which is as long as..."

Is answer choice D fully correct? Shouldn't "which" be repeated considering the parallelism rules("and which weighs" instead of "and weighs")?If not, when should the first word of parallel clauses be repeated?
And if my logic is correct how do you choose the right answer when no answer seems right to you in the given options(basically which error should you ignore)
Thanks.

OFFICIALLY CORRECT ANSWERS ARE CORRECT!
do not question officially correct answers!
far too many students on this forum make the mistake of questioning the correct answers; please note that doing so is a complete waste of your time and effort. i.e., exactly 0% of the time that you spend posting "isn't this official answer wrong?" is productive, and exactly 100% of that time is wasted.

"is this correct?" is NEVER a productive question to ask about one of GMAC's correct answers -- the answer is always yes.
"is this wrong?" / "is this X type of error?" is NEVER a productive question to ask about one of GMAC's correct answers -- the answer is always no.

instead, the questions you should be asking about correct official answers, if you don't understand them, are:
"why is this correct?"
"how does this work?"
"what understanding am i lacking that i need to understand this choice?"

this is a small, but hugely significant, change to your way of thinking -- you will suddenly find it much easier to understand the format, style, and conventions of the official problems if you dispose of the idea that they might be wrong.

--

there's no reason to repeat “which” in the correct answer, since it is by default the subject of both verbs. (along similar lines, there's no need to repeat “i” in the sentence “i shut the windows and locked the doors.”)

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your response.But then I had one more question. One of the rules in the parallelism chapter is that you need to repeat the connecting words like who, which ,that, etc.
How is our right choice different from that.The reason I am trying to understand this is so that on the real exam I just do not dismiss an answer when I do not see the repeating subordinators as I did in the above question.

Thanks for your help and patience.

Quote the rule and give us a page number..

_________________
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor

Page no 54 of the 4th edition SC guide.

"Parallel clauses should always start with the same word."

Question no 13 on pg 60:

Explanation states that "who" must be repeated (In addition to the missing "and").

hmm. yeah, that's not actually an absolute rule.

generally, when constructions are shorter -- as in the problem considered here -- there's no need to repeat the subordinators. consider the following very short sentence:
Harold is the only member of the football team who listens to classical music and speaks Latin.
this sentence is perfectly understandable and readable with just the one instance of “who” (and with "listens ... and speaks" as its parallel structure). in fact, if you add in another "who" -- who listens to classical music and who speaks latin -- the sentence becomes considerably more clunky and awkward.

in a longer sentence, on the other hand, exactly the opposite is true.
Harold is the only member of the football team who listens to classical music, such as Beethoven's symphonies and Chopin's preludes, all day on Sundays and who speaks Latin for fun.
--> if you remove the second “who”, the sentence will still be technically correct -- but it will basically be unreadable. try it. therefore, in this kind of case you would want the repeated subordinator.