plz explain..
Nuclear power industry's cost to meet environmental safety norms is said to reach ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of teh decade
A)Nuclear power industry's cost to meet environmental safety norms is said to reach ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of teh decade
B)It is estimated that by the end of the decade the cost to nuclear power industry of meeting environmental safety norms will be ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy
C)By the end of the decade, nuclear power industry's cost of meeting environmental safety norms is projected at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy
D)To meet environmental safety norms, the cost to nuclear power industry is estimated at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of the decade.
E) Nuclear power industry's cost by the end of the decade to meet environmental safety norms is estimated at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy.
Ans B....nuclear industry's cost...is ambiguous...
plz explain..
Nuclear power industry's cost to meet environmental safety norms is said to reach ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of teh decade
A)Nuclear power industry's cost to meet environmental safety norms is said to reach ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of the decade
is said to is not correct. You cannot make a future estimation with said to. Hence incorrect.
B)It is estimated that by the end of the decade the cost to nuclear power industry of meeting environmental safety norms will be ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy
This is correct/better than other options.
C)By the end of the decade, nuclear power industry's cost of meeting environmental safety norms is projected at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy
This sentence says By the end of the decade, X is projected at . This does not seem to be idiomatic. A better sentence would be By the end of the decade, X will be
D)To meet environmental safety norms, the cost to nuclear power industry is estimated at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy by the end of the decade.
This sentence says To meet environmental safety norms, X is estimated , which completely changes the meaning of the sentence. Hence incorrect.
E) Nuclear power industry's cost by the end of the decade to meet environmental safety norms is estimated at ten percent of the price per kilowatt-hour(KWH) of energy.
Nuclear power industrys cost makes this sentence incorrect.
My answer B. Explanation given above in bold .
Descending approximately 4,000 years ago from the African
wildcat, it has been an exceedingly short time for the domestic cat
with respect to genetic evolution and it scarcely seems sufficient to
allow the marked physical changes that transformed the animal.
Descending approximately 4,000 years ago from the African
wildcat, it has been an exceedingly short time for the domestic
cat with respect to genetic evolution and it scarcely seems
sufficient to allow the marked physical changes that
transformed the animal.
The domestic cat descended from the African wildcat
approximately 4,000 years ago, which is an exceedingly short
time for the domestic cat's genetic evolution and scarcely
sufficient sufficient for the marked physical changes that transformed
the animal.
Descending from the African wildcat approximately 4,000
years ago, the domestic cat has had an exceedingly short time
for its genetic evolution and has been scarcely sufficient for
the marked physical changes in the animal.
Having descended from the African wildcat approximately
4,000 years ago, the domestic cat has had an exceedingly
short time for its genetic evolution that has scarcely been
sufficient for the marked physical changes that transformed
the animal.
The domestic cat descended from the African wildcat
approximately 4,000 years ago, an exceedingly recent
divergence with respect to genetic evolution and one which
scarcely seems sufficient to allow the marked physical changes
in the animal.
(i hate this type of SC question not coz they r tough but coz they eat up lot of valuable time in verbal section 😞 )
a) Wrong. IT does not have a proper referent and the opening modifier does not have an object to modify.
b)Doubtful but I think it is wrong because WHICH can refer to either of the nouns: the CAT or the time period of 4000 years. I have usually observed that if the pronoun WHICH does not have clear antecedent, it is better not to select the choice.
c)doubtful and wrong. The modifier correctly modifies the "Domestic cat" but then the later part of the AND seems to be describing a thing that this "domestic cat" seems to be doing instead of indicating the "time period". I believe this conjugation is incorrect and alters the meaning. For example - "I scarcely had time to fold my clothes and get ready". Here the latter part of the AND is something that I am doing or didn't do but in the sentence the lack of time is not something that the "domestic cat" can or cannot do.
d) Correct (I would have selected this). The modifier "having descended.... " clearly is pointing to the domestic cat. Here the "THAT", an essential modifier, clearly points to the time the cat had to evolve. The meaning is clear.
e)WRONG. "exceedingly recent divergence" is wordy.
Let me know if you agree with this and what the correct answer, with the reasoning, is.
Please feel free to disagree with me. I would love to know where I went wrong.
Thank you,
Hemanth
Equestrian enthusiasts predict that the alleged abuse of anabolic steroids among horse trainers would subside as long as the testing of the animals is more random and more rigorously enforced.
d. will subside if random testing of the animals were
e. will subside if random testing of the animals is
(source: princeton verbal workout)
my doubt..
although option E was looking equally good but i choosed option D coz in the underlined part of the sentence 'predict that'(bold text) was given.. i preferred using subjunctive tense over simple present tense.. but answer given is optioin E.. it has also mentioned dat option D uses subjunctive tense so option E is better.. but y??
plz explain..
Equestrian enthusiasts predict that the alleged abuse of anabolic steroids among horse trainers would subside as long as the testing of the animals is more random and more rigorously enforced.
d. will subside if random testing of the animals were
e. will subside if random testing of the animals is
(source: princeton verbal workout)
my doubt..
although option E was looking equally good but i choosed option D coz in the underlined part of the sentence 'predict that'(bold text) was given.. i preferred using subjunctive tense over simple present tense.. but answer given is optioin E.. it has also mentioned dat option D uses subjunctive tense so option E is better.. but y??
plz explain..
Here is what I think.
"random testing of the animals"- is singular so should be followed by a singular verb form e.g. is/was. based on this d is out. because "were" is the plural form of "was". So E it is.
To explain further why it should be "is" and not "was" - "predict that" & "will subside" tells us that sentence is in the present - so the correct of the verb form would be "is".
Here is what I think.
"random testing of the animals"- is singular so should be followed by a singular verb form e.g. is/was. based on this d is out. because "were" is the plural form of "was". So E it is.
To explain further why it should be "is" and not "was" - "predict that" & "will subside" tells us that sentence is in the present - so the correct of the verb form would be "is".
this was not my question.. i know subject-verb agreement..
my question is why is the use of subjunctive tense wrong here in this question??
this was not my question.. i know subject-verb agreement..
my question is why is the use of subjunctive tense wrong here in this question??
Dare2.. you are quite right. Gail the use of was/is is not correct in the subjunctive even though the subject is singular. Standard example in any book - "If I WERE rich, I would buy the ambani house". Though I is singular the verb is WERE (the type - TO BE).
So Dare2..I have seen these a few times and noticed that PREDICTION is not the typical subjunctive we read in books. There are apparently 6 types of subjunctives (I looked it up and didn't understand the need to understand them at this point). The type of subjunctive that we use is called the COMMAND SUBJUNCTIVE which uses the "if x were ...y would".
So basically use future tense with PREDICTIONS and not the typical subjunctive. Also, a prediction is something that someone is doing with some certainty "I predict that India WILL win today and Sachin will score a duck". It is rare to say "I predict that India would win today and Sachin would score a duck".
My 2 Rs
Thank you.
Hmm..thats what i thought...but the answer suggests otherwise -
1.In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them in the area just for the season.
(A) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them
(B) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of whom are
(C) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of who are
(D) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustle with farm workers, many of whichďźˆA
(E) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many are
The answer is 'A'.
Guys, let's go back to this Q.
I doubt if 'that' makes a difference to the tense. From no angle would we refer to greenfields in this sentence.
I googled this SC, and found that there has been a lot of discussions and really, no site has given any convincing response.. But generally most agree that the tense used should be singular.
below was the best explanation i could see:
http://www.beatthegmat.com/many-of-them-or-many-of-whom-t8979.html?highlight=patchwork
probably this shows wy 1000sc is not altogether trustworthy.
The group of freshers that has arrived today will be addressed by the director.
In the above sentence, 'have' does not seem apt. I think 'that' has no bearing on the tense.
However, I am not sure why 'whom' is correct here, as whom refers to the workers, who form the subject in the latter half of the sentence. Maybe if it was re-phrased as ...fam workers, whom the community disbarred a year ago - here community is the subject, so, 'whom' should be correct. Anyone concurs?
In most GMAT guide books, subjunctive is actually given much more weightage than it perhaps deserves (from GMAT perspective). Even otherwise, English communication is witnessing progressively lesser usage of subjunctive.
In general, with 'if' clauses, restrict the usage of subjunctive to obviously untrue situations only (for example, If I were you, I would do this).
The current sentence under consideration is a straight conditional statement (of the category: If it is a sunny day today, I will go to swimming) and hence subjunctive is redundant here.
Hi Ashish, can you pls elaborate on " obviously untrue situations " ?
If I were rich, I would marry Deepika
If I were richer, I would marry Deepika..
If Deepika were hotter, she would stop traffic.
How can we decide an untrue situation from its counterpart?
4). Early medieval monasteries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modem libraries.
(A) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modern libraries
(B) like modern libraries, often served as text repositories, though they were clearly less accessible to outsiders
(C) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts as does the modern library
(D) like modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts
(E) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, acted like modern libraries act by serving as repositories for texts, like modern libraries.
Guys, this has been discussed before, bt somehow I was left with some lingering doubts. can we pls discuss it again? Will post the OA (and my query) after it has been discussed or answered. Ta.
4). Early medieval monasteries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modem libraries.
(A) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modern libraries
(B) like modern libraries, often served as text repositories, though they were clearly less accessible to outsiders
(C) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts as does the modern library
(D) like modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts
(E) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, acted like modern libraries act by serving as repositories for texts, like modern libraries.
Guys, this has been discussed before, bt somehow I was left with some lingering doubts. can we pls discuss it again? Will post the OA (and my query) after it has been discussed or answered. Ta.
(A) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modern libraries. Usage of like modern libraries is not correct here. We are comparing acts and not monastaries and libraries.
(B) like modern libraries, often served as text repositories, though they were clearly less accessible to outsiders Usage of though is ambigous here. Moreover the sentence means that modern libraries used to serve as repositories in the past.
(C) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts as does the modern library. This is correct. uses 'as' to compare the acts of monasteries and modern library and clearly states that modern libraries serve the purpose at present.
(D) like modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts. Again means that modern libraries served the purpose in past.
(E) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, acted like modern libraries act by serving as repositories for texts, like modern libraries. Very awkward. Did not even feel to find any error here after reading half the sentence. ha ha ha
Thanks,
Anurag...
Guys, this has been discussed before, bt somehow I was left with some lingering doubts. can we pls discuss it again? Will post the OA (and my query) after it has been discussed or answered. Ta.
4). Early medieval monasteries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modem libraries.
(A) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts, like modern libraries - makes it appear that modern libraries are examples of text.
(B) like modern libraries, often served as text repositories, though they were clearly less accessible to outsiders - they ambiguous.
(C) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts as does the modern library - not parallel.
(D) like modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts - The fragments have been incorrectly arranged and implies the meaning that modern libraries are clearly less accessible which changes the original meaning of the sentence.
(E) while clearly less accessible to outsiders, acted like modern libraries act by serving as repositories for texts, like modern libraries. - awkward and wordy and makes it appear that modern libraries are examples of text.
So here I see errors in all the choices. Now the big question - what is the best out of these?
(C) appears to be clear and maintains the original meaning. Not sure though.
EducationAisle SaysActually they in choice B is not ambiguous. Early medieval monasteries is the noun-subject in the first clause (Early medieval monasteries often served as text repositories), while they is the pronoun-subject of the second clause (they were clearly less accessible to outsiders) and hence, structurally (and logically as well) is un-ambiguous.
In option A, I think usage of like is fine, except that it can be assumed to mean that modern libs are less accessible. For examples, they would use 'such as' rather than 'like'. Like in option C can also mean modern libs are less accessible. And clearly they don't want to say libs are non accessible.
I would be inclined to go with Ashish, i.e. option 'B'.
But the OA is 'A'.. this SC was discussed in a prev page of pagalguy itself..not able to remem which page though.
On a different note, can these two sentences mean different things (like vs as) ? If not, then they both can be used interchangably I suppose, with proper structuring, but this is nto something i have read or heard before.
Early medieval monasteries, as do modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts.
Early medieval monasteries, like modern libraries, while clearly less accessible to outsiders, often served as repositories for texts.
In the example you've used:
The group of freshers that has arrived today will be addressed by the director.
Since you've mentioned that, it would automatically modify group, since that cannot modify freshers. If modifying freshers was your intent, the sentence should have been:
The group of freshers who have arrived today will be addressed by the director.
As for usage of whom, the 'rule' to remember is that prepositional phrases always use the object form of pronoun. of whom is a prepositional phrase (since it starts with the preposition of) and hence, whom (an object pronoun) is the correct usage here.
For the 1st part, on page 783, dare2 gave the below post:
"ook here 'surround' modifies green fields not patchworks coz of 'that'..
if ithe sentence were widout that ie 'a patchwork of green fields surrounds..' is correct..
in short we can say..
a patchwork of green fields surrounds..
a patchowork of green fields that surround.."
And so 'that' became the focal point. And so left me thinking.
Try this below:
One of the German dialects IS widely spoken and sounds very sweet to the ears.
One of the German dialects that ARE commonly used in West Germany, sounds very sweet to the ears.
The sentences are correct. But usage of that, makes a significant difference. The singular form in second sentence is not in is/are but in 'sounds'
Back to the original e.g.
1.In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them in the area just for the season.
(A) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them
(B) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of whom are
I think it's just plain luck that the patchwork can't bustle with farm workers (like one of the languages can sound sweet). Otherwise option A doesn't too bad.
I am missing something or thinking more than necessary. Comments welcome.
Another one to ponder over:
Lies vs lay vs laid v lain, can someone please explain? (referring to the meaning - to possess)
Present - Her skills lie in her ability to lie smoothly
Past - Her skills lay in her ability to lie smoothly
For the 1st part, on page 783, dare2 gave the below post:
"ook here 'surround' modifies green fields not patchworks coz of 'that'..
if ithe sentence were widout that ie 'a patchwork of green fields surrounds..' is correct..
in short we can say..
a patchwork of green fields surrounds..
a patchowork of green fields that surround.."
And so 'that' became the focal point. And so left me thinking.
Try this below:
One of the German dialects IS widely spoken and sounds very sweet to the ears. here the sentence is talking about one of the diaects that is widely spoken and not the German Dialects because 'is' here is modifying one of the dialects.
One of the German dialects that ARE commonly used in West Germany, sounds very sweet to the ears. here the second clause of the sentence ", sounds very sweet to the ears." is modifying one of the German Dialects but 'are' is connected to Geman Dialects.
The sentence in literal terms means that one of the German dialects sounds very sweet to the ears. but German dialects are spoken widely in the West Germany.
So, we are provided with two information here which is not the case in the first sentence.
So if we see a comma is making difference here.
The sentences are correct. But usage of that, makes a significant difference. The singular form in second sentence is not in is/are but in 'sounds'
Back to the original e.g.
1.In good years, the patchwork of green fields that surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them in the area just for the season.
(A) surround the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of them
(B) surrounds the San Joaquin Valley town bustles with farm workers, many of whom are
I think it's just plain luck that the patchwork can't bustle with farm workers (like one of the languages can sound sweet). Otherwise option A doesn't too bad.
I am missing something or thinking more than necessary. Comments welcome.
Ok I will try to explain my thinking here.
One of the German dialects IS widely spoken and sounds very sweet to the ears. here the sentence is talking about one of the diaects that is widely spoken and not the German Dialects because 'is' here is modifying one of the dialects.
One of the German dialects that ARE commonly used in West Germany, sounds very sweet to the ears. here the second clause of the sentence ", sounds very sweet to the ears." is modifying one of the German Dialects but 'are' is connected to Geman Dialects.
The sentence in literal terms means that one of the German dialects sounds very sweet to the ears. but German dialects are spoken widely in the West Germany.
So, we are provided with two information here which is not the case in the first sentence.
So we see a comma is making difference here.
.
Thanks,
Anurag...
Pl. post ur explanations
1)The clicking sound that accompanies an active turn signal on most cars is not a mechanical noise, created by the mechanism that connects the drivers lever to the flashing light; rather an artificially created sound effect to alert the driver that the signal is activated.
a) light; rather
b) light, but rather
c) light, but rather that of
d) light, but that of
e) light; it is that of
2) Machines powered by hydraulics are not driven by the steam produced by boiling water, but rather, high-pressure fluids are transmitted throughout the machine to various motors and hydraulic cylinders.
a) water, but rather
b) water, but instead
c) water; instead
d) water; rather
e) water; but
One question from my side. Please let me know yor reasoning.....
Machines replacing human labor, there was wide anticipation that the workweek would continue to become shorter.
(A) Machines replacing human labor, there was wide anticipation that
(B) When machines replaced human labor, there was wide anticipation
(C) As machines replaced human labor, it was widely anticipated that
(D) Insofar as machines replaced human labor, it was widely anticipated
(E) Human labor being replaced by machines, there was wide anticipation that
Thanks,
Anurag...
Machines replacing human labor, there was wide anticipation that the workweek would continue to become shorter.
(A) Machines replacing human labor, there was wide anticipation that
(B) When machines replaced human labor, there was wide anticipation
(C) As machines replaced human labor, it was widely anticipated that
(D) Insofar as machines replaced human labor, it was widely anticipated
(E) Human labor being replaced by machines, there was wide anticipation that
Thanks,
Anurag...
Pl. post ur explanations
1)The clicking sound that accompanies an active turn signal on most cars is not a mechanical noise, created by the mechanism that connects the drivers lever to the flashing light; rather an artificially created sound effect to alert the driver that the signal is activated.
a) light; rather
b) light, but rather
c) light, but rather that of
d) light, but that of
e) light; it is that of
2) Machines powered by hydraulics are not driven by the steam produced by boiling water, but rather, high-pressure fluids are transmitted throughout the machine to various motors and hydraulic cylinders.
a) water, but rather
b) water, but instead
c) water; instead
d) water; rather
e) water; but
My take:
1. D
2. C