ya I know they are the correct answer. But I am requesting you to post them later. So that I will have a chance give my guess 😃
Got it...sure i will post them later here after...sorry for the inconvenience...
Though glass is the conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (correct answer)
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy difficult to mould and is potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection to motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (your response)
conventional way of providing a cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavier, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
the ans given is B. Ps explain.
Though glass is the conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (correct answer)
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy difficult to mould and is potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection to motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (your response)
conventional way of providing a cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavier, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
the ans given is B. Ps explain.
Hi Shweta this is not the correct thread for posting ur query. This thread is for discussing CR questions. The correct thread is :
http://www.pagalguy.com/discussions/gmat-sentence-correction-discussions-25020698
I am sure you will get much more response there than on this thread.
Anyway, as far as your question is concerned, the only difference that i can see between ur response and the correct response is the idiom " protection for " instead of the idiom "protection to ".
Well as far as i am concerned " protection to " does seem right to me. And as you may be knowing, there is no hard and fast rule for idioms. They are used in a certain way because thats the way people have grown accustomed to using them.
I'll have to admit though that i used to think that " protection to " is the correct idiom.
Though glass is the conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (correct answer)
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy difficult to mould and is potentially dangerous.
conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection to motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (your response)
conventional way of providing a cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavier, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
the ans given is B. Ps explain.
On second thoughts , it seems the question is checking the correct usage of the idiom " providing X for Y " .
Though glass is the conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
- conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, but it is heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
- conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (correct answer)
- conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavy difficult to mould and is potentially dangerous.
- conventional way of providing cheap, stable, and durable protection to motorists, it is also heavy, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous. (your response)
- conventional way of providing a cheap, stable, and durable protection for motorists, it is also heavier, difficult to mould and potentially dangerous.
the ans given is B. Ps explain.
The correct answer is correct cause it uses the correct idiom- X provides for Y.
and Saurav, there are rules for Idioms. they can't used be 'just like that' and modified.
And Guys ple check before posting in which thread you are posting ques.
and the concernced SC thread is following:
http://www.pagalguy.com/discussions/gmat-sentence-correction-discussions-25020698
Individual threads exist for DS,PS,SC,RC and CR.
And one request- ple don't post the correct answer with the ques.
Give people a chance to at least solve/read the ques. post the correct answer after a day.
Regards,
Neha
The correct answer is correct cause it uses the correct idiom- X provides for Y.
and Saurav, there are rules for Idioms. they can't used be 'just like that' and modified.
Regards,
Neha
No, what i meant was u can't say why a particular idiom is right and another is wrong. For eg. you cant say why " X provides for Y " is right and why " X provides to Y " is wrong. There is no grammar rule per se which applies here. Its just that these "expressions" called "idioms" are generally accepted as correct by most of the /all English speakers.
Regards
Shashi
PS: I use my friends PG Id.
GMAT educational series
1) Before joining anybody for GMAT please make it sure that he has taken the GMAT himself.
2) Ask him to show his GMAT SCORE on the official link
http://www.pearsonvue.com/entry/gmat/vosr.jsp?regID=218113741&key;=79ca06cee3ff2d2de6e1e15abc2f05748190d50e
by supplying his authentication code..
3) Take a demo class from him.
4) Do not pay the whole fees upfront so that you reserve the right to leave the institute at any point of time you are not satisfied.
sunitaazami, Advertising is not allowed here on PG.
Do you guys read the PG rules at the time of registration?
Kindly, help me in solving these. I will post the answers later.
Given below is a passage consisting of four paragraphs. In each paragraph the closing part of the last sentence has been left out. In each of the following questions, from the given options, choose the one that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.
1)In or around 1605, European literature changed. No one realised it at the time, but when Don Quixote
set off to save the world, a new kind of writing was born. The old forms of storytelling-the epic, the
romance, the oral tale-would from now on be pitted against a boisterous young rival. Before long it
would be universally acknowledged that a reader ____________________________________ .
a)hoping to enjoy a good story must be in search of a novel.
b)remains a literary force to be reckoned with.
c)articulates a basic human desire-the desire to be many people, as many as it would take to assuage the burning desires that possess us.
d)is a similar combination of irony, seriousness and principled reticence.
e)could reveal the immense, mysterious power of the pointless.
2)The art of reading a novel involves a dash of experiment, conjecture, even risk. It requires readers to try out different narrative perspectives, styles, even personalities, and so to explore the inherent variousness of experience, and to recognise the vein of arbitrariness that runs through any possible version of events. Novels, in short, are implicitly pluralistic. In this respect they resemble essays, which, as it happens, came into existence at more or less the same time (Montaigne launched the form in 1580, with Bacon following in 1597). Essays tend to be classier, more learned and more demandingthere is no essayistic equivalent of the popular noveland even when written in a perfectly casual style, they are likely to be strewn with half-concealed quotations or allusions to flatter or perhaps annoy the smarter class of reader. As exercises in hesitation, exploration and experimental self-multiplication, they are like novels, only more so. You might even say that the novel aspires to the condition of the essay, and __________________
a)keeps returning to the question of the novel form.
b)teaches us that there is no perfect way of carving up the world or recounting its stories.
c)there is certainly no shortage of novelists who have aspired to be essayists too.
d)it has its intellectual origins in the prodigious work of a novelist.
e)is an aspect of the ever-developing human spirit.
3)Think of Eliot or Henry James, Woolf, Forster or Orwell, or Mann, Sartre, De Beauvoir, Camus and
Mary McCarthy. And as the four recently published books now lying open on my kitchen table
demonstrate, the essay-writing novelist is still a literary force to be reckoned with. In his luminous new collection, The Curtain, Milan Kundera argues that the special virtue of the novel lies in its ability to part the magic curtain, woven of legends that hangs between us and the ordinary world. The curtain has been put there to cover up the trivia of our lives, the forgotten old boxes and bags where an enigma remains an enigma while ugliness flirts with beauty, and reason courts the absurd. These neglected spaces were redeemed for literature, according to Kundera, at the moment when Cervantes got his readers to imagine Don Quixote as he lay dying while his niece went on eating, the housekeeper went on drinking and Sancho Panza went on being of good cheer. By inventing a narrator through whose consciousness such dumb events could be worked up into an affecting scene, Cervantes created a form of literature that could do justice to modest sentiments; and so a new kind of beauty Kundera calls it prosaic beautywas born. Henry Fielding took the technique further when he created a narrator who could charm his readers with benign loquacity, and Laurence Sterne completed the development by blithely allowing the story of Tristram Shandy ____________________________
a)to rent the curtain that separates us from the prose of ordinary life.
b)to pass through a long night of lyrical self-absorption.
c)to emerge on the other side in a state of bewildered, uncertain enlightenment.
d)to specialize in moral wisdom.
e)to be ruined by the character trying to recount it.
My Answers:
1) A
2) C
3) E
Kindly, help me in solving these. I will post the answers later.
u got all 3 correct. Can u explain?
go_racer_goo Saysu got all 3 correct. Can u explain?
Sure, sorry for late reply. the explanations are:
1) since the paragraphs are a part of the same passage, we have to consider the theme of the whole passage while choosing the answer options. In this paragraph, the author discusses the changes that happened in the genre of european literature. the author talks about a 'new kind of writng was born'. he further illutrates that the old forms of storytelling would have to compete against a 'young rival'. therefore, we have to pick up an answer option which introduces the 'young rival'. option A accomplishes this, hence it is the correct answer. the reader is not a 'literary force' as it is mentioned in option B, this makes option B incorrect. Option C revolves around the expectations of the reader which are his personal expectations and show no relevance to the passage, this makes option C incorrect. In option D the word 'similar' trends to compare the reader with someone/something, which is ironical, serious and has a principled reticence. The paragraph does not mention any of these attributes anywhere, which makes option D incorrect. Option E does not follow the theme of the paragraph, hence it is incorrect.
2) the paragraph starts by the author describing the 'art of reading the novel'. Then it draws similarities between the novel and eassy. the paragraph progresses further by establishing the superioity of the essay over the novel. In the last line the author talks of the novel aspiring to the 'condition of the essay', hence it would require an answer option that continues the discussion further and also relates it to the next paragraph. Option A does not fulfill the requirement as it suggests a regression rather than a progression, moreover which would not suggest 'You might even say...' is 'and' which would not suggest any dramatic turn in the tone of the original sentence. This makes option A correct. Similarily, options B,D and E talk of the the novel whereas the next paragraph starts with the names of renowned essay-writing novelists. Option C mentions both novelists and essayists; it carries the theme mentioned in this paragraph and even relates to the next paragraph, thus it is the right answer.
3) the paragraph focuses on 'prosaic beauty' where there is an amalgamation of opposites-'ugliness flirts with beauty, and reson courts the absurd'. Towards the end of the paragraph the author talks of a positive attribute while discussing the technique of Henry Fielding. We have to provide an answer choice that describes the completion of the development by Laurence Sterne. Keeping in view the structure of the prargraph we have to pick an answer choice which talks of a negtive development. Option E does this aptly. Option A is contradictory to the theme of the paragraph. Option B,C and D would be applicable in case of a person; they do no pertain to the 'story'.
Regards,
Neha
thank you. Your explanations were useful. Can suggest any source where I can learn how to approach CRs?
can any one explain why the answer to the following question is B?
people who have specialized knowledge about a scientific or technical issue are systematically excluded from juries for trials where the issue is relevant. thus trial by jury is not a fair means of settling the disputes involving such issues
which one of the following if true most seriously weakens the argument?
a)the more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given.
b)the more a jury knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is more likely that a juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins.
c)appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling a disputes involving scientific or technical issue, because arbitrator tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issue.
d)experts who gives testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge on their conclusion by discussing the possibility of error.
e) experts witnesses in a specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involve in litigation cannot afford their services
we are asked to show that trial by jury is a fair means of settling the disputes..that means we have to point out some explanation of why it is fair. and how can you do that? by poinitng some negative quality of the trial. and that is what B does. B says that by keeping the people with knowledge about technical/scientific, on jury will lead some negative effect in favor of the party for which the jury is supposed to support and not harm the party.
Did i made you confuse? read again what B says and try to make sense of it. it will come. don't ge confused by long not required words. the answer is simply given behind those useless phrases.
hope it clears your doubt.
you can use princeton review, manhattan gmat review, Cr bible score and OG-12/10/11 is a must.
All the best
Regards,
Neha
Did i made you confuse? read again what B says and try to make sense of it. it will come. don't ge confused by long not required words. the answer is simply given behind those useless phrases.
can any one explain why the answer to the following question is B?
people who have specialized knowledge about a scientific or technical issue are systematically excluded from juries for trials where the issue is relevant. thus trial by jury is not a fair means of settling the disputes involving such issues
which one of the following if true most seriously weakens the argument?
a)the more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given.- we are not concernced about how much the issue is complicated and how much knowledge is reqd
b)the more a jury knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is more likely that a juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins.- correctly gives the point to weaken the conclusion.
c)appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling a disputes involving scientific or technical issue, because arbitrator tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issue.-strengths the conclusion
d)experts who gives testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge on their conclusion by discussing the possibility of error.- doesn't address the issue at that the people with knowledge are not excluded from the jury
e) experts witnesses in a specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involve in litigation cannot afford their services- we are not concerned about the fees
hope it clears your doubt.
go_racer_goo Saysthank you. Your explanations were useful. Can suggest any source where I can learn how to approach CRs?
you can use princeton review, manhattan gmat review, Cr bible score and OG-12/10/11 is a must.
All the best
Regards,
Neha
Television sitcom writers get no opportunities to craft scripts that are truly "out of the box." One contributing factor is the pressure from the network to follow a formula that has a proven ability to deliver high ratings. At the same time, there is pressure from advertisers to avoid edgy or controversial material that might offend the audience. These factors taken together make it impossible for television sitcom writers to create scripts that break new ground.
Which of the following is an assumption that is required to draw the conclusion above?
(A) If advertisers believed that edgy material helped sell their products, television sitcom writers would have opportunities to write what they want.
(B) The formulas that sitcoms follow did not start out as edgy or innovative.
(C) The formulas that networks prefer are not always as safe and uncontroversial as the advertisers would like.
(D) Television sitcom writers do not engage in scriptwriting outside of that required for their jobs.
(E) The formulas, which guarantee high ratings, are also the formulas most likely to be approved by advertisers.
The single idea that is the most useful in Critical Reasoning on the GMAT is the Contrapositive. Heres how to form a contrapositive:
Step 1: Start out with a cause/effect statement. This is best done in the if/then format. Heres our example: If you are a fish, then you live in water. This statement is arguably true (with the exception of mudskippers, but thats debatable!).
Step 2: Now, reverse the elements of your statement: If you live in water, then you are a fish. This statement is not NECESSARILY true. Many other, non-fish organisms live in water as well, like whales, seaweed, crustaceans, and plankton.
Step 3: Negate both sides of the statement: If you dont live in water, then you are not a fish. This statement is equally true as the original statement. It is the CONTRAPOSITIVE!
When you have complex statements, that involve and or or, you must switch them around. For example, the contrapositive of If you are at least 18 years old and registered, then you can vote is If you cant vote, then you are not at least 18 years old OR not registered. If one of those two elements is missing, the person cannot vote. Simple, really!
Now, lets apply our knowledge of the contrapositive to a Critical Reasoning question, and see why its so useful:
The interview is an essential part of a successful hiring program because, with it, job applicants who have personalities that are unsuited to the requirements of the job will be eliminated from consideration.
The argument above logically depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) A hiring program will be successful if it includes interviews.
(B) The interview is a more important part of a successful hiring program than is the development of a job description.
(C) Interviewers can accurately identify applicants whose personalities are unsuited to the requirement of the job.
(D) The only purpose of an interview is to evaluate whether job applicants personalities are suited to the requirements of the job.
(E) The fit of job applicants personalities to the requirements of the job was once the most important factor in making hiring decisions.
My Take:
1)A
2)C
Intially i thought, D is the answer- but it uses "the only purpose of interview", well, interview is an essential part to check whether ppl have reqd qualifications. but no where in the sentence it says-interview has this purpose only so i would have marked C.
Television sitcom writers get no opportunities to craft scripts that are truly out of the box. One contributing factor is the pressure from the network to follow a formula that has a proven ability to deliver high ratings. At the same time, there is pressure from advertisers to avoid edgy or controversial material that might offend the audience. These factors taken together make it impossible for television sitcom writers to create scripts that break new ground.
Which of the following is an assumption that is required to draw the conclusion above?
(A) If advertisers believed that edgy material helped sell their products, television sitcom writers would have opportunities to write what they want.
(B) The formulas that sitcoms follow did not start out as edgy or innovative.
(C) The formulas that networks prefer are not always as safe and uncontroversial as the advertisers would like.
(D) Television sitcom writers do not engage in scriptwriting outside of that required for their jobs.
(E) The formulas, which guarantee high ratings, are also the formulas most likely to be approved by advertisers.
The interview is an essential part of a successful hiring program because, with it, job applicants who have personalities that are unsuited to the requirements of the job will be eliminated from consideration.
The argument above logically depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) A hiring program will be successful if it includes interviews.
(B) The interview is a more important part of a successful hiring program than is the development of a job description.
(C) Interviewers can accurately identify applicants whose personalities are unsuited to the requirement of the job.
(D) The only purpose of an interview is to evaluate whether job applicants personalities are suited to the requirements of the job.
(E) The fit of job applicants personalities to the requirements of the job was once the most important factor in making hiring decisions.
what's the OA?
and the right explanation.
1. E
2. C
Whats the OA?