my take in bold, pl.
1.Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the moviesless than those killed by bee stings.
a. moviesless than those
b. moviesfewer than have been
c. movies, which is less than those
d. movies, a number lower than the people
e. movies, fewer than the ones
2.Like their male counterparts, women scientists are above average in terms of intelligence and creativity, but unlike men of science, their female counterparts have had to work against the grain of occupational stereotyping to enter a "man's world."
(A) their female counterparts have had to work
(B) their problem is working
(C) one thing they have had to do is work
(D) the handicap women of science have had is to work
(E) women of science have had to work
my take in bold, pl.
1.Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the moviesless than those killed by bee stings.
a. moviesless than those
b. moviesfewer than have been
c. movies, which is less than those
d. movies, a number lower than the people
e. movies, fewer than the ones
2.Like their male counterparts, women scientists are above average in terms of intelligence and creativity, but unlike men of science, their female counterparts have had to work against the grain of occupational stereotyping to enter a "man's world."
(A) their female counterparts have had to work
(B) their problem is working
(C) one thing they have had to do is work
(D) the handicap women of science have had is to work
(E) women of science have had to work
Bail ki aankh....I mean bulls eye!!!!
How i you eliminate 1(e) and 2(a)
1.Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the moviesless than those killed by bee stings.
a. moviesless than those
b. moviesfewer than have been
c. movies, which is less than those
d. movies, a number lower than the people
e. movies, fewer than the ones
2.Like their male counterparts, women scientists are above average in terms of intelligence and creativity, but unlike men of science, their female counterparts have had to work against the grain of occupational stereotyping to enter a "man's world."
(A) their female counterparts have had to work
(B) their problem is working
(C) one thing they have had to do is work
(D) the handicap women of science have had is to work
(E) women of science have had to work
My take:
1. b. moviesfewer than have been
2. e. women of science have had to work (since the comparison is with men of science
double post.....
Bail ki aankh....I mean bulls eye!!!!
How i you eliminate 1(e) and 2(a)
to be frank..these questions looked 'familiar'...although i can't remember exactly....
btw, in general...i try to maintain parallelism as far as possible...:)
Hi,
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
Hi,
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
1. B ( use of 'would' is essential,'confined to' is proper idiom )
2. B ( 'who' must be used to refer to people , 'once' and 'childhood' are concise and clearly expresses intended meaning)
wht are OA's?
Hi,
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
Would go with:
1. E : to allow + confined to, i think gets the correct meaning and grammar
2. B : who is required + D can be eliminated because of change in meaning
@:sausi007, dipak9412: Thanks for the replies
The answers are:-
186. E
188. B
Hi,
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
My take E and B
Q1. The contenders are options B and E..
In my opinion, B is wrong for couple of reasons:
that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
1. X instead of Y.. X and Y should be parallel in the usage.. Here to go home is not parallel to confined to .. Confined to alone is a fragment ... Moreover, rather than is preferred to instead of to compare clauses ...
2. Would is not required in the sentence as there is no uncertainty involved..
Q2. who is required to modify people.. B is the most concise option
While reading an editorial today, I found few sentences suspicious, can someone pl throw some light on it.
1. For millions of Indians, hunger is routine, malnutrition rife,employment insecure, health care expensive and livelihoods are under threat ,arguing for an urgent need for social security.
does it not required the last part to be in parallel construction something like 'livelihoods threatened' or is it that 'threatened' meaning 'endangered' is used to refer plants and animals only? and secondly who is 'arguing' ?
2. There has been a strong demand for credit and,consequently liquidity has tightened recently. -
here, i think it should have been in passive voice and 'liquidity has been tightened'..
3. CCTs are not a panacea for poverty,ill health or for stabilizing population.
here too poverty,ill health are nouns so it should have been 'population stabilization' and 'for' before it should be removed.
pl correct me , if i'm missing any GMAT grammar rules here
regards
Dipak
While reading an editorial today, I found few sentences suspicious, can someone pl throw some light on it.
1. For millions of Indians, hunger is routine, malnutrition rife,employment insecure, health care expensive and livelihoods are under threat ,arguing for an urgent need for social security.
does it not required the last part to be in parallel construction something like 'livelihoods threatened' or is it that 'threatened' meaning 'endangered' is used to refer plants and animals only? and secondly who is 'arguing' ?
2. There has been a strong demand for credit and,consequently liquidity has tightened recently. -
here, i think it should have been in passive voice and 'liquidity has been tightened'..
3. CCTs are not a panacea for poverty,ill health or for stabilizing population.
here too poverty,ill health are nouns so it should have been 'population stabilization' and 'for' before it should be removed.
pl correct me , if i'm missing any GMAT grammar rules here
regards
Dipak
1. I guess the statement is completely wrong. Many things are not grammatical in sync or even correct in itself. For Example, Employment insecure ...does not make any sense to me. Similarly health care expensive should have rather been the opposite way (expensive healthcare). livelihoods are under threat is not parallel to anything . In fact even the other things are not parallel to each other. And finally, consider the structure: for amny millions of indians....arguing for ...does not make sense again.
2. I guess this statement is right. Consider this one for an example which I am using to show why the statement is right:
I have gone through many bad experiences last year, but I think i have grown strong as a result of that. (sounds right?)
what about this(this is as per your logic)
I have gone through may bad experiences last year, but I think I have BEEN growing strong as a result of that. Thought the statement is not gramatically wrong, but it completely changes the meaning. The first one focuses on the fact that the person has grown strong , whereas the second one tries to convey the process of growing throughout the suffering(bad experiences).
What a pescimistic example to qoute ..eh..
3.I am confused on this one. Though I would say for must be removed before the stabilizing population.
However, stabilizing population can be a noun(called as gerund) based on the flow of the statement. so it is parallel in that case
I also think E as most suitable option.
Bail ki aankh....I mean bulls eye!!!!
How i you eliminate 1(e) and 2(a)
1(e) though I am not pretty sure whether B is the right answer. Having said that, I dont find any other answer doing too good as well. I have doubts on the usage of the Dash and I will get back to my fundamentals and comment back again.
I would eliminate e on parallelism grounds the comparision should be between number of people , the option e compares number of people with the people themselves by using "ones"
2(a) I dont think this is wrong, Whats wrong with "their female counterparts ..". It is perfectly in tune with the statement. The statement begins with the same style. Can someone explain whats actually wrong here. I think its not too words and not awkward as well.
Infact I think the option E is repating the words "of science" unnecessarily. Anyone seconds?? Ashish/EducationAisle??
1(e) though I am not pretty sure whether B is the right answer. Having said that, I dont find any other answer doing too good as well. I have doubts on the usage of the Dash and I will get back to my fundamentals and comment back again.
I would eliminate e on parallelism grounds the comparision should be between number of people , the option e compares number of people with the people themselves by using "ones"
2(a) I dont think this is wrong, Whats wrong with "their female counterparts ..". It is perfectly in tune with the statement. The statement begins with the same style. Can someone explain whats actually wrong here. I think its not too words and not awkward as well.
Infact I think the option E is repating the words "of science" unnecessarily. Anyone seconds?? Ashish/EducationAisle??
yup you are correct! these are actually confusing SC's. I got them wrong and when i googled them I found quite a few experts also not very comfortable these OA's though everyone got them right. Moreover these are GMAT prep Q's...
I have the same opinion regarding 1 (after going through all explanations).
However I derived an explanation for the 2nd one after lot of effort.
the option 2a goes like
"Modifier+Clause","Modifier+Clause"
Now the sentence contains a pronoun (their counterpart) in the 1st modifier (which is OK) but it deceptively places similar pronoun in the clause giving the impression of sm. This means
a. the 2nd modifier is modifying a pronoun which refers to itself or
b. The pronoun refers to some other noun (i.e. in the 1st clause)
Either way it is wrong!
I am not sure how correct this line of argument is but it worked for me in other modifier+clause SC's
My Takeaway- be very careful with Pronouns in such Clauses
Hi,
I know the correct answers but I need the explanations:-
188. As a result of medical advances, many people that might at one time have died as children of such
infections as diphtheria, pneumonia, or rheumatic fever now live well into old age.
(A) that might at one time have died as children
(B) who might once have died in childhood
(C) that as children might once have died
(D) who in childhood might have at one time died
(E) who, when they were children, might at one time have died
Thanks :)
Check out detailed response to this question in the following link.
https://e-gmat.com/blogs/?p=462
186. Judge Bonham denied a motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of
to confine them to a hotel.
(A) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of to confine them to
(B) that would have allowed members of the jury to go home at the end of each day instead of confined to
(C) under which members of the jury are allowed to go home at the end of each day instead of confining
them in
(D) that would allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than confinement in
(E) to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day rather than be confined to
This is a great question which exemplifies the importance of understanding the meaning of the sentence.
Meaning: This sentence describes a motion that a judge denied. This motion was to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day. The previous law or rule was to confine the jury members to a hotel.
Now that we understand the meaning of the sentence, we will perform the Error Analysis on the original sentence. We will check for the key grammar rules that are applicable in this sentence - SV, verb tense, pronoun, parallelism.
* This sentence contains 1 clause with SV pair - "judge denied". OK
* The verb tense is simple past stating an action that happened at a point in time in the past. OK
* Pronoun "them" is used correctly to refer to members of the jury. OK
* There is a list in this sentence:
The motion to allow members to
1. go home at the end of each day instead of
2. confine them to a hotel
Notice that the list is not:
The motion
* to allow members to go home at the end of each day instead of
* to confine them to a hotel
This is a key point in this question. From the meaning of the sentence, we need to understand that the contrast has been made between what the members are allowed to do:
are they going home or
are they confined in a hotel.
Now in the light of this lets review the list in original choice again:
Element 1 : The motion to allow members to go home at the end of each day. OK
Element 2: The motion to allow members to confine them to a hotel. NOT OK
This non-sensically states that members will confine members to a hotel. Infact, members are not doing the action of confine. They are actually being confined. Thus, use of passive voice is required here.
Now lets focus on the correct choice E.
Element 1: The motion to allow members of the jury to go home at the end of each day. OK
Element 2: The motion to allow members of the jury to be confined to hotel. OK
Thus, just based on the meaning of the sentence, we were able to solve this question.
Have come across this question before. Pronoun their, in their female counterparts is at best ambiguous, since it might refer to men of science (which it should) or to women scientists (notice that their in like their male counterparts is already referring to women scientists).
E obviously removes this ambiguity.
-------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Ashish
GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
GMAT - 99th Percentile, MBA - ISB
Thanks Ashish. small question on this: Lets say if there are multiple antecedents available for a pronouns in question. What are the options I have. Should I
a) is there a way to choose which one is the antecendent that the pronoun is actually pointing to.
b) should i always says that its a case of multiple antecedents and hence an ambiguous pronoun and mark the option as incorrect on that basis?
Another Question: Should a pronouns always refer to a Noun as an antecedent. Can an antecedent be something other than a noun??
1(e) though I am not pretty sure whether B is the right answer. Having said that, I dont find any other answer doing too good as well. I have doubts on the usage of the Dash and I will get back to my fundamentals and comment back again.
I would eliminate e on parallelism grounds the comparision should be between number of people , the option e compares number of people with the people themselves by using "ones"
.Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark, the man-eater of the moviesless than those killed by bee stings.
a. moviesless than those
b. moviesfewer than have been
c. movies, which is less than those
d. movies, a number lower than the people
e. movies, fewer than the ones
Alrit, So I went back to the strategic guide and read the explanation on Dash
Heres what it says: a dash can be replaced with a semicolon,colon or a comma depending on the context at any given point of time.
However , I tried substituting all three of them but realized that none of them make sense.
The book also says, that a Dash can be used to restate or explain the earlier part of the sentence, which again does not fit the bill as per me. Can some one help me understand if the part of the sentence after the dash in any ways restates or explains the earlier part?
Having said all of that the best answer still is B, as all other are comparing number with people and hence violate parallelism. But I thought it will be of great value to add this explanation on Dash.
Thanks Ashish. small question on this: Lets say if there are multiple antecedents available for a pronouns in question. What are the options I have. Should I
a) is there a way to choose which one is the antecendent that the pronoun is actually pointing to.
b) should i always says that its a case of multiple antecedents and hence an ambiguous pronoun and mark the option as incorrect on that basis?
Another Question: Should a pronouns always refer to a Noun as an antecedent. Can an antecedent be something other than a noun??
Hi Abhishek,
I also used to face similar issues with pronoun ambiguity. I somehow was not as clear as other errors are. I found this article very helpful.
Pronoun Ambiguity Errors in GMAT | GMAT Prep, Sentence Correction, Ciritical Reasoning, OG Solutions
Try accessing the other articles as well as referenced in this post. You will get to see the application of this method.
It took me a while to get used to this, but once I applied this one a few official questions, I was more comfortable with the idea.
:) Aman