Question
The Rorschach test is gaining new respect as a diagnostic tool because it takes only one hour to expose behavior and thought processes that may be unlikely to emerge in other procedures or weeks of ordinary interviewing.
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 Rorschach test is gaining (Main Subject – “The Rorschach test”; Main Verb – “is gaining”)
- new respect (Object for the main verb)
- as a diagnostic tool (Prepositional phrase – modifies the main verb)
- because it takes only one hour (Dependent clause – modifies the main verb)
- to expose behavior and thought processes (Infinitive phrase acting as the idea that takes only one hour. In this clause, “it” is a placeholder pronoun)
- that may be unlikely to emerge (Relative clause – modifies behavior and processes)
- in other procedures or weeks of ordinary interviewing. (Prepositional phrase – modifies “emerge”)
- that may be unlikely to emerge (Relative clause – modifies behavior and processes)
- to expose behavior and thought processes (Infinitive phrase acting as the idea that takes only one hour. In this clause, “it” is a placeholder pronoun)
- new respect (Object for the main verb)
The sentence talks about a test that is gaining new respect. Why is it gaining respect? Because it exposes certain behavior and processes that other procedures may not be able to expose.
There are no major grammar or meaning issues in the sentence. However, the sentence has the following two quality issues:
- Redundancy: “may be” and “unlikely” are redundant. Either you say “may not” or “is unlikely”.
- Since the word “weeks” is a noun, one can consider it parallel to “procedures”. In such a case, it’d mean “other weeks of ordinary interviewing”. Not a logical idea. To clarify that “weeks” is parallel to “other procedures”, we need to repeat the preposition “in”.
Option Analysis
(A) Incorrect. For the reasons mentioned above.
(B) Incorrect. This option has the second issue of option A. In addition, “whose emergence” means “emergence of behavior and processes”. I don’t think we put it like this in standard English. The correct way to communicate this idea is “behavior and processes may emerge”.
(C) Correct. “May not” and “might not” are generally used interchangeably. However, in some contexts, “may not” be considered equivalent to “does not have the permission”. Thus, some books recommend using “might not” over “may not” in situations in which we are talking about chances, not permission.
(D) Incorrect. This option has the second issue of option A. In addition, the use of “may not” is not preferred, as explained above.
(E) Incorrect. For the following reasons:
- Currently, the construction is “This test takes one hour to expose behavior and processes likely not to emerge…”. To convey the meaning more clearly, we need a relative clause modifier “that are likely not to emerge”.
- “emerge during an activity” is different from “emerge in an activity”. The former means that the “emergence” happened at the same time as the activity while the latter means that the “emergence” happened inside the activity. The latter makes more sense in this context.
- Here, “other procedures” seems to talk about procedures other ordinary interviewing. However, in the given context, it makes much more sense to talk about procedures other than the Rorschach test.
This solution was created by Anish Passi and Chiranjeev Singh.
If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask in the comments section.
How is emerge during an activity and emerge in an activity same?