3) The genetic code of hominids accounts not only for all current human diversity but also the differences between modern humans as opposed to earlier hominids, and yet most are identical to the genetic code of chimpanzees.

  1. the differences between modern humans as opposed to earlier hominids, and yet most are
  2. the differences of modern humans with earlier hominids, and yet most is
  3. for the differences of modern humans from earlier hominids, and yet most is
  4. for the differences of modern humans from earlier hominids, and yet most are
  5. for the differences of modern humans with earlier hominids, and yet most is

[spoiler show=”Explanation”]
3) Split #1: the once outside or twice inside construction.  It would be correct to say “for not only P but also Q”, or to say “not only for P but also for Q.”  The “for” comes after “not only” in the non-underlined part of the sentence, so this means we must choose the “twice inside” structure.  Another “for” must follow the words “but also”.   Choice (A) & (B) are incorrect.
Split #2: the idiom with “difference.”   The correct idioms are “difference between P and Q“ or “difference of P from Q”.  The structures “difference between P as opposed to Q” and “difference of P with Q” are abominably incorrect.  Choice (A) & (B) (E) are incorrect.
Split #3:  The subject of the second clause is the word “most” — most what?  Most of “the genetic code of hominids“, which is singular.  We need the singular verb “is“.   Choice (A) & (D) are incorrect.
For all these reasons, (C) is the only possible answer.
[/spoiler]


4) The People’s Republic of China, having 1.3 billion people,  with many of which living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often have been considered as an emerging superpower.
(A) having 1.3 billion people,  with many of which living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often have been considered as
(B) having 1.3 billion people,  many living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often has been considered as
(C) with 1.3 billion people,  many living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often has been considered
(D) with 1.3 billion people, with many of them living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often have been considered
(E) with 1.3 billion people, with many living in outlying rural areas far to the west of Beijing, often has been considered to be

[spoiler show=”Explanation”]Explanation1) Split #1: China has a ton of people, but the name of the country itself is singular.  Singular subject demands a singular verb, “has been“.  Answers with the plural verb, “have been“, (A) & (D), are incorrect.Split #2: idiom with “considered” — The structures “consider P as Q” and “consider P to be Q” are both idiomatically incorrect.  The correct idiom is “consider P Q“, with no preposition or intervening words between the two nouns.  Only choices (C) & (D) have this correct.Split #3: the structure of the modifier.  What happens after the word “people” varies —
(A) “with many of which living …” — very awkward, not correct
(B) “many living …” — correct & elegant, an absolute phrase
(C) “many living …” — correct & elegant, an absolute phrase
(D) “with many of them living …” — very awkward, not correct
(E) “with many living …” — awkward, not acceptable on the
The only possible answer is (C).
[/spoiler]

5) Until the time of Cantor’s work on set theory in the 1870s, no serious mathematician anywhere in the world, even the giants in the field, like Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, were able to appreciate that infinity can be studied with rigorous precision.
(A) even the giants in the field, like Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, were
(B) not even the giants in the field, such as Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, were
(C) not the giants in the field, like Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, was
(D) even the giants in the field, such as Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, were
(E) not even the giants in the field, such as Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss, was

[spoiler show=”Explanation”]

2) Split #1: the subject, “no serious mathematician“, is singular.  Thus, it demands a singular verb, “was“.  Choices (A) & (B) & (D) make the mistake of using “were“, so these are incorrect.
Split #2: listing examples.  For a list of examples, the  disapproves of “like“, and prefers “such as“.  The choices that use “like Leonard Euler and Karl Gauss” are incorrect.  Choices (A) &  (C) make this mistake.
Split #3a: logic mistake.  After the comma after “no serious mathematician“, we need to repeat the negative. Choices (A) & (D) don’t do that.
Split #3b: a subtle logic mistake involving the word “even“.  If we say, “no serious mathematicians anywhere in the world, not giants such as Euler and Gauss“, then something is funny —- the phrase “serious mathematicians anywhere in the world” sounds like a large inclusive category, but “giants such as Euler and Gauss” sounds like a smaller elite group.  Without the word “even“, we are equating these two groups, and something is awkward and not right about this.  Including the word “even” resolves this problem: it clearly distinguishes the larger, more inclusive category, from the special case elite group.  The correct answer needs to include the word “even“.  This is another problem with answer choice (C).
The only possible answer is (E).
[/spoiler]

 

Related Articles

2 Comments

  1. ritesh

    good level of qu. but post on regular basis. i have seen early post on some days quizes r not provided by this site.

    Reply
    1. prem007

      @ritesh for following bankersdangl, we would try to post on every day..

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

copyright @2018. All rights reserved by Bankers Dangal.