Anda di halaman 1dari 23

GMAT Club Test Center - Test

1 of 41
Verbal

Sentence Correction

Verb Tense / Form

The city will lose more than one million dollars in much-needed revenue when the shopping center on Beacon
Drive will close sometime in the next year and move to a different county.

will close sometime in the next year and move to a different county

closes sometime in the next year and moves to a different county

will close in the next year sometime and move to a different county

closes sometime in the next year and will move to a different county

will close sometime in the next year and then move to a different county
HIDE EXPLANATION
This sentence requires the recognition that the word when creates a conditional tense that requires the (e)s form of the verb, and
also that both verbs in the following phrase must use parallel form. The complete and correct verb phrase, without supporting
words, should read: when the shopping center closes and moves.
1. Though the verbs in this option are parallel, they are not in the e(s) form required by the word when.
2. Closes and moves are the parallel verb forms required by the word when.
3. The verb forms will close and move are not the conditional form required by the word when, and the word sometime is
awkwardly placed.
4. Verb forms closes and will move are not in parallel form.
5. Then is unnecessary, and the verb forms will close and move are not in the e(s) form required by the word when.
The correct answer is B

Discussed at GMAT Club forum

I am not totally convinced on the use of when in this sentence. The sentence looks better with if

"The city will lose more than one million dollars in much-needed revenue when (If) the shopping center on Beacon Drive will close
sometime in the next year and move to a different county.

One can see that sentence has a construction that If shopping center on beacon drive will close in next year then the city will lose more
than one million dollars in revenue.

Note that the non underlined portion has then construction. And the general rule that I follow for If then construction is as follows
Attachment:

Untitled.png [ 6.69 KiB | Viewed 894 times ]

So for then clause construction in Simple future tense, we can use Simple present tense in If clause. With this you are down to B and D. D
is not parallel as the second verb "will move" on option D is not parallel to "closes"

Ans is B

Hope it helps

Another Alt explanation for this Question : the-city-will-lose-more-than-one-million-dollars-in-60760.html#p439367


_________________

GMAT Club Test Center - Test

5 of 41
Verbal

Reading Comprehension (RC)

Long Passage

V04-11
ReviewedBookmark
Although the class of anti-inflammatory drugs known as COX-2 inhibitors has proven successful at reducing pain and swelling, a
series of clinical trials has shown that these drugs come with potentially harmful side effects. Anti-inflammatory drugs act
onprostaglandins, hormone-like substances with a general regulatory role in the body controlling blood flow to the kidneys or
prompting contraction of the uterus during childbirth, for example in addition to bearing the primary responsibility for causing pain
and inflammation. Prostaglandins are the result of a process by which a type of acid in the cell membrane is transformed by two
enzymes both known as cyclooxygenase, or COX-1 and COX-2. Older anti-inflammatory medications such as aspirin and ibuprofen
stop pain by blocking the action of both COX enzymes. Researchers have long been aware, however, that the simultaneous
repression of both COX-1 and COX-2 halts production of all prostaglandins, including those not responsible for pain.
Researchers who developed COX-2 inhibitors hoped to avoid negative side effects by blocking only one of the two COX enzymes.
After a series of trials, drugs such as Vioxx and Celebrex entered the market in the 1990s. This approach, unfortunately, soon
presented its own drawbacks. Although COX-2 inhibitors do in fact prevent production of prostaglandin E2(PGE2), which is
responsible for causing pain and inflammation,they also drastically reduce the amount of various other substances in the body,
including prostacyclin (PGI2), which dilates blood vessels and prevents clots. On the other hand, COX-2 inhibitors do not prevent the
production of thromboxane, another prostaglandin that constricts vessels and helps blood platelets clump. There is widespread
agreement that the next step for researchers is to develop anti-inflammatory drugs that target specific prostaglandins rather than
the enzymes that produce them.
According to the passage, a problem with COX-2 inhibitors arises for which of the following reasons?
COX-2 inhibitors
often conflict with older types of anti-inflammatory medication.

cause the production of an excessive amount of prostaglandin E2.

do not suppress an excessive amount of thromboxane, which causes blood clots.

do not account for the complexity of prostaglandin function.

block the production of necessary regulatory substances.


HIDE EXPLANATION
The phrase according to the passage in the question stem is a signal that this question can be answered using specific details from
the passage. In order to answer the question, review significant lines or sentences in the paragraph to determine which is accurate.
The correct answer will be a paraphrase of information stated in the passage.
1. The interaction of COX-2 inhibitors with other anti-inflammatory medications is not discussed in the passage.
2. Actually, COX-2 inhibitors successfully blockproduction of this substance. See here.
3. Though this is true, the larger problem with COX-2 inhibitors is that they do block the substance that keeps thromboxane in
balance.
4. This is a distortion of details from the passage.
5. The passage states that COX-2 inhibitors block the production of PGI2, which dilates vessels and prevents clots.
The correct answer is E

It can be concluded from the passage that COX-2 inhibitors are in danger of accidentally disrupting which of the following bodily
processes?

constriction of blood vessels

inflammation

cell division

kidney function

enzyme production
HIDE EXPLANATION
The answer to this question depends on making an inference. More specifically, the question requires the connection of information
in the first and third paragraphs. It is stated in the first paragraph that prostaglandins regulate certain healthy functions, such as
blood flow to the kidneys. In the second paragraph it is stated that COX-2 inhibitors disrupt the production of various
prostaglandins, which could reasonably include those that control kidney function.
1. These lines state that COX-2 inhibitors do not block thromboxane, which constricts blood vessels.
2. COX-2 inhibitors are anti-inflammatories intended to disrupt inflammation.
3. Cells are mentioned in the passage, but not cell division.
4. Since this line states that prostaglandins regulate blood flow to the kidneys and this line states that COX-2
inhibitors interrupt the production of various prostaglandins, it can reasonably be concluded that COX-2
inhibitors could disrupt kidney function.
5. COX-2 inhibitors deliberately interrupt the function of COX enzymes, but their production is not discussed in the passage.
The correct answer is D

V02-33
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
Technology Analyst: Most technologies become less effective over time. Some experts go so far as to
recommend that every technology will be redundant after 15 years and should be replaced by a new technology,
thus replacing all of its existing infrastructure and personnel. However, this policy would be impractical since certain
technologies have trivial applications, such as in motor operated equipment used in households and,
and therefore cannot afford to be permanently discontinued.
In the technology analysts argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first is evidence offered in support of an opinion that the technology analyst rejects; the second offers
information that contradicts that evidence.

The first is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but argues against; the second offers evidence that
supports the analysts position.

The first is a position that the technology analyst argues against; the second is the position that the analyst defends.

The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for
an opinion that the analyst rejects; the second is a consideration used to defend the analysts position.

The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for
the analysts position; the second offers another consideration used to defend that position.
HIDE EXPLANATION
The conclusion of the technology analyst is that the experts' recommendation to eliminate every government agency after 15 years
and should be replaced by new technology is impractical. The first bold-faced statement, the generalization that technologies
become less effective over time, is used as evidence to support the experts' position. The second bold-faced statement, the
observation that certain technologies cannot afford even temporary upheaval, is used to defend the analyst's position.

1. The first part of this choice is correct the second is not. The second bold-faced statement does not contradict the premise
that technologies lose their effectiveness over time.
2. This choice correctly states that the second bold-faced statement offers evidence in support of the technology analyst's
position. It is true that the first bold-faced statement is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but, she does not
argue against this premise; instead, the analyst argues against the experts' position, which is based on this premise.
3. The first bold-faced statement is not a position that the technology analyst argues against; in fact, the first bold-faced
statement is one that the analyst accepts as true. Furthermore, the second bold-faced statement is not the technology
analyst's position; it is the evidence offered in support of the analyst's position.
4. Correct. The first bold-faced statement, the fact that technologies become less effective over time, is accepted by the
technology analyst as true and yet is used as evidence to support the experts' position, which the technology analyst rejects.
The second bold-faced statement, the observation that certain technologies cannot afford even temporary upheaval, is used
to defend the analyst's position.
5. This choice correctly states that the second bold-faced statement offers a consideration in support of the technology
analyst's position. It is also true that the first bold-faced statement is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as
accurate but, the first bold-faced statement is not used as the basis for the analyst's position; it is used as the basis for the
experts' position.
The

GMAT Club Test Center - Test


11 of 41
Verbal

Reading Comprehension (RC)

Short Passage

V06-39
ReviewedBookmark
The Toxic Substances Control Act, enacted by the United States Congress in 1976, had an ambitious humanitarian goal: to protect
people and their environment from harmful chemicals. Tens of thousands of industrial chemicals had entered the world market
since the late 1940s, and the TSCA was one of the first legislative attempts to control their toxicity. Before this time, industrial
chemicals were completely unregulated, and few had questioned whether any of them might ultimately prove harmful. TSCA
granted the government the authority to track and regulate industrial chemicals in order to prevent harmful substances from finding
their way into a wide range of consumer goods.

What began as an innovative caretaking program, however, failed in the ensuing decades to deliver on its promise. The failure is
primarily the result of a momentous loophole in the screening guidelines of TSCA, which prioritized chemical company profits over
more vital human and environmental interests. The TSCA, rather than outlining a procedure for testing older chemicals, exempted
chemicals already on the market from toxicity screening and, by extension, from regulation. Consequently, over 90% of chemicals
on the market today have neither been tested to determine their level of toxicity nor been studied to evaluate their impact on the
environment. Even more problematic, the structure of the TSCA makes it more profitable for industry to continue manufacturing
chemicals that may or may not be harmful than to develop alternative, guaranteed-safe formulas.

Which of the following sentences represents the most logical continuation of Paragraph 2 above?

Because of this, it is practically assured that any toxic chemical on the market before 1976 is still at large in the
human population today.

What is more, the Environmental Protection Agency is also severely lax in its oversight function.

Not only this, but health researchers have also discovered an undeniable link between environmental factors and certain types of
cancer.

In the long term, however, human populations will be better served if manufacturers will adjust the composition of their most
popular chemicals.

Nevertheless, industrial chemical companies continue to enjoy yearly economic growth.


HIDE EXPLANATION
The answer to this question depends on determining the logical direction in which Paragraph 2 is moving, so that
a continuation of that direction can be provided. The paragraph begins with the statement that TSCA has failed to
protect humans and the environment, and the rest of the paragraph is a discussion of how. The failure, according to the
passage, is a result of aloophole that exempted chemicals already on the market from screening and regulation. Most chemicals on
the market today fall under this category and have not been screened; additionally, the structure of the TSCA may actually
discourage companies from testing their chemicals or developing safe formulas. Only sentence (A) continues this line of reasoning,
because it draws a logical conclusion to the discussion of the loopholein TSCA: any chemical not screened in 1976 is likely still on
the market.
1. This option correctly identifies a logical conclusion to the discussion of the loophole in TSCA that exempted
chemicals already on the market from screening and regulation. Any chemical that was not screened when
TSCA was enacted is likely still on the market.
2. The Environmental Protection Agency and its functions are not mentioned in the passage.
3. While this may be true, it does not continue the discussion in the paragraph.
4. This sentence replies only to the last sentence in the passage and not to Paragraph 2 as a whole.
5. This option pertains to industrial chemical companies, but it does not represent a continuation of the
discussion in the passage.
The correct answer is A
GMAT Club Test Center - Test

17 of 41
Verbal

Sentence Correction

Rhetorical Construction

V08-19
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
Wilhelm I was recognized by the Treaty of Frankfurt as the Emperor in 1871, when Germany first became a single,
unified state.

Wilhelm I was recognized by the Treaty of Frankfurt as the Emperor in 1871, when Germany first became a single,
unified state.

Wilhelm I was recognized by the Treaty of Frankfurt in 1871 as Emperor, when Germany first became a single,
unified state.

Germany first became a single, unified state in 1871, when the Emperor Wilhelm I was recognized by the Treaty of
Frankfurt.

Germany first became a single, unified state in 1871, when the Treaty of Frankfurt recognized Wilhelm I as Emperor.

In 1871, Germany first became a single, unified state, when the Treaty of Frankfurt recognized Wilhelm I as the
Emperor of the country.
HIDE EXPLANATION
(A) This sentence illogically implies that the treaty recognized Wilhelm as the Emperor in 1871, when it simply recognized him as
the Emperor

(B) The dependent clause beginning with 'when Germany' illogically refers to Emperor

(C) The passive voice construction 'when the Emperor Wilhelm I was recognized by the Treaty' is less idiomatic than
the active voice construction of choice D; the word 'the' in 'the Emperor Wilhelm I' is unnecessarily wordy

(D) Correct. The active voice construction 'the Treaty of Frankfurt recognized Wilhelm I' is idiomatically correct

(E) The phrase 'The Emperor of the country' is unnecessarily wordy

The correct answer is D

GMAT Club Test Center - Test


20 of 41
Verbal

Critical Reasoning

Strengthen

V07-33
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
Recent dental research shows that bacteria around the gum line produces a substance that in sufficient amounts can
induce preterm labor in pregnant women and can cause heart disease by clogging arteries. Both medical outcomes
add to payouts by health insurers to medical-service providers. The bacteria is best removed by a dentist or trained
hygienist during a routine cleaning. One health insurer has calculated that it can reduce its payouts by reimbursing
subscribers who are either pregnant or at high risk of developing heart disease for the cost of one professional dental
cleaning per year. Which of the following, if true, most stongly supports the assertion that the insurer's payouts to
medical-service providers will decrease if it implements the reimbursement plan described above?

Dental-hygiene regimens such as brushing or flossing can slow the accumulation of the bacteria-produced substance.

Individuals are generally less likely to postpone or forego inexpensive or free dental procedures than
expensive ones.

Pregnant women typically crave sugary foods, which are proven to contribute to tooth decay.

The risk of developing heart disease is greater for individuals with a family history of heart disease
than for those with no such history.

The dental health of pregnant women and heart-disease patients, as a group, is similar to that of the general
population.
HIDE EXPLANATION
The clear intent of the reimbursement policy is to prompt pregnant women and people at risk of heart disease to schedule more-
frequent professional dental cleanings a procedure that may help prevent preterm labor or heart disease. But the policy will carry
its intended result only if those subcribers act accordingly. Of the five choices, (B) provides the clearest evidence that they will do
so. The correct response is (B). The correct answer is B

PREMISE 1.- Recent dental research shows that bacteria around the gum line can induce preterm labor in pregnant women and can cause
heart disease by clogging arteries.
PREMISE 2.- Both medical outcomes add to payouts by health insurers to medical-service providers.
PREMISE 3. - The bacteria is best removed by a dentist or trained hygienist during a routine cleaning.

CONCLUSION.- One health insurer has calculated that it can reduce its payouts by reimbursing subscribers who are either pregnant or at
high risk of developing heart disease for the cost of one professional dental cleaning per year.

(A) Dental-hygiene regimens such as brushing or flossing can slow the accumulation of the bacteria-produced substance. BUT WILL THE
PAYOUTS REDUCE... DOES'NT ANSWER.....INCORRECT

(B) Pregnant women typically crave sugary foods, which are proven to contribute to tooth decay....IRRELEVANT..WILL THE PAYOUTS
REDUCE... DOES'NT ANSWER.....INCORRECT
(C) The risk of developing heart disease is greater for individuals with a family history of heart disease than for those with no such
history..WILL THE PAYOUTS REDUCE... DOES'NT ANSWER.....INCORRECT..
(D) Individuals are generally less likely to postpone or forego inexpensive or free dental procedures than expensive ones....CORRECT
ANSWER....WILL ALSO REDUCE PAYOUTS AS MORE PEOPLE GO FOR FREE DENTAL PROCEDURES
(E) The dental health of pregnant women and heart-disease patients, as a group, are similar to those of the general
population...IRRELEVANT..WILL THE PAYOUTS REDUCE... DOES'NT ANSWER.....INCORRECT

GMAT Club Test Center - Test

24 of 41
Verbal

Critical Reasoning

Weaken

V04-20
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
Several internet-based companies that use open-source software for their day-to-day operations have been surprised
at the degree to which volunteer contributions increase productivity. At the same time, the overall profits of most of
these companies have increased, since a much smaller percentage of overall revenue per working hour must be
directed toward salaries. Beginning internet companies should imitate this successful model by hiring only a small
core staff and leaving the rest of the tasks to volunteers.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that a beginning internet company can best
increase its profitability by relying on volunteer labor?

Internet companies can also increase profitability by paying lower salaries to more full-time employees.

Cash flow in internet companies is very different from cash flow in traditional companies, so that not all bookkeeping
procedures apply.

Internet companies often perform tasks that are highly specialized, and volunteers are not always able
to complete necessary portions of projects.

The average number of hours worked by a volunteer at an internet company is already greater than the average
number worked by volunteers at traditional companies.

Volunteers often hold other full-time jobs, making their actual financial contributions to internet
companies difficult to calculate.
HIDE EXPLANATION
Situation:In order to increase profits, beginning internet companies should hire few staff and rely on volunteers for the bulk of
tasks.
Reasoning: Which most clearly shows a problem with relying on volunteer labor? The advantages of volunteer labor come in terms
of both productivity and profit. If, however, the presence of volunteers can be shown to actually damage one of these goals, then
the soundness of the model proposed by the plan will be seriously undermined.
1. This option does not speak directly to the question of whether volunteers are best for a beginning company.
2. Bookkeeping procedures are not mentioned in the passage; this statement is out of scope.
3. This option directly undermines the suggestion that volunteers are good for all starting internet businesses by describing a
situation in which volunteers could actually undermine productivity.
4. The average number of hours worked by volunteers has no impact on the soundness of the plan. Also, traditional
companies are not mentioned in the passage.
The passage is concerned primarily with the productivity contributions of volunteers, which translate into financial
5.
contributions. The fact that volunteers hold other jobs would have more impact on the volunteers themselves than it would
on the finances of the internet company.
The correct answer is C

GMAT Club Test Center - Test

28 of 41
Verbal

Sentence Correction

Verb Tense / Form

V03-02
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
Unfortunately for the commuters who lost their lives when the bridge collapsed, the engineer was not honest at the
preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he was questioned about the structures weight-bearing abilities.

was not honest

was not

was honest

had not been honest

had not been being honest


HIDE EXPLANATION
This sentence requires past perfect verb form to indicate that the engineers dishonesty occurred at a definite point in the past. The
point in the past is indicated by the phrase at the preliminary safety hearing.
1. Was not honest is past tense, not past perfect, and does not sufficiently indicate the order of events discussed in the
sentence.
2. The word honest is missing from this answer choice, changing the meaning of the sentence.
3. This answer choice is the opposite meaning of the underlined portion.
4. The words had not been honest correctly indicate past perfect tense and demonstrate that the engineers dishonesty
occurred at a definite point in the past.
5. The word being is redundant and unnecessary.
The correct answer is D

GMAT Club Test Center - Test

38 of 41
Verbal
Critical Reasoning

Evaluate An Argument

V07-18
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decreasing percentage of the total weight of
domestic garbage in the Brazil. The increasingly widespread practice of recycling aluminum and plastic was
responsible for most of this decline. However, although aluminum recycling was more widely practiced in this period
than plastic recycling, it was found that the weight of plastic bottles in domestic garbage declined by a greater
percentage than the weight of aluminum cans.
Which of the following, if true of the Brazil in the period 2000 to 2010, most helps to account for the finding?

Plastic bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.

Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled plastic bottles
had contained products other than beverages.

Manufacturers replaced many plastic bottles, but few aluminum cans, with polymer containers.
i mean basically though aluminium is much more widely recycled ...then the only way there is higher
reduction is when the denominator the total platics is reduced while the number of bottles being
recycled are same as in previous case ...hence there will higher reduction in the % wt of plastic bottles

The total weight of plastic bottles purchased by domestics increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of
aluminum cans.

In many areas, plastic bottles had to be sorted by color of the plastic before being recycled, whereas aluminum cans
required no sorting.
HIDE EXPLANATION
This problem turns on the differences between PERCENTAGES and ABSOLUTE NUMBERS.

Facts:

1. The PERCENTAGE of recycled aluminum was higher than the PERCENTAGE of recycled plastic. This is what it means when we
say that aluminum recycling was more widely practiced.

BUT

2. the NUMERICAL CHANGE in aluminum in the trash was lower than the NUMERICAL CHANGE in plastic in the trash.

If all the stuff missing from the trash had been recycled, this would be impossible. Therefore, we need another explanation, besides
recycling, for WHY THE TOTAL USE OF PLASTIC HAS GONE DOWN. Thats the only way that these findings are mathematically
possible.

(c) Is such a statement.

(d) Is the EXACT OPPOSITE of this sort of statement. if (d) were true, we would expect to see aluminum, not plastic, declining at a
faster rate in the trash.

The correct answer is C


GMAT Club Test Center - Test

41 of 41
Verbal

Sentence Correction

Verb Tense / Form

V08-18
ReviewedBookmark
Your last answer was incorrect
According to Alistair Macleans novel, the invincible mountainous terrain of Navarone in the sea of Aegean was of
utmost military importance to the German throughout the Second World war, because they realized that, if they did
not exploit its strategic location, their survival against the indomitable naval might of the British was always in peril.

if they did not exploit its strategic location, their survival against the indomitable naval might of the British was
always in peril

if they did not exploit its strategic location, their survival against the indomitable naval might of the
British could be liable to be in peril

If they did not exploit its strategic location, their survival against the indomitable naval might of the
British would be always in peril

if they were not to exploit its strategic location, their survival against the indomitable naval might of the British was
always in peril

their survival against the indomitable naval might of the British was always in peril, should they fail to exploit its
strategic location
HIDE EXPLANATION
A. The conditional and the main clause are in the same tense; the main sentence should be in the future modal.

B. ''could be liable to be'' is redundant and awful.

C. Correct choice with the conditional clause in simple past, and the main clause in future modal.

D. Correct subjunctive is were they not to exploit" and not "if they were not to". Secondly, this is no hypothetical wish; so not an
apt choice for subjunctive use.

E. 'Should is used in the place of 'if'. Normally it denotes some future happening. Hence, the main clause cannot be in the past
tense, logically.

The correct answer is C


Dec 19, 2009 7:47 pm

Quote
lunarpower wrote:

these gmatclub problems are not good.

WARNING:
verb tenses are difficult and subtle.
as in pretty much any other language in the world, the features that distinguish one tense from another are extremely subtle and difficult to
articulate.

GOOD NEWS:
it's extremely rare for the gmat to test past vs. past perfect as a deciding factor. i.e., if there's a past / past perfect issue, there will usually
also be other problems with the sentence.

here's the basic deal:


you should use the PAST PERFECT for the earlier of two past events IF:
- it's the EARLIER event
- the events are not listed in PARALLEL (i.e., not "X and then Y"; "did x, did y, and did z"; etc)
- the earlier event has an impact/influence on, or is relevant in some way to, the later event

mmslf75 wrote:
#1 Unfortunately for the commuters who lost their lives when the bridge collapsed, the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public
safety commission hearing, when he was questioned about the structures weight-bearing abilities.

A was not honest


B was not
C was honest
D had not been honest
E had not been being honest

OA D

ok, this one should definitely be (d). his dishonesty at the hearing came before "lost their lives"; they're not parallel structures; and the
relevance is clear.

however, there's a problem: the non-underlined part shouldn't say "he was questioned". it should say "he had been questioned", since it's
simultaneous with (and therefore should be parallel to) the underlined verb.

Quote:
#2 Before the storm destroyed much of the harbor, this town, with its sandy beaches and multiple opportunities for sports, had been one of
the most popular resort destinations on the East Coast.

A had been
B has been
C had been being
D was being
E was

OA E

bad question. this one can actually go either way.

if you're trying to emphasize the fact that the town was a popular destination (and downplay the destruction), you'll use "was".
if you're trying to emphasize the destruction (in contrast to the previous status of the town), you'll use "had been".

two more examples:


tom had been a professional football player before his leg was injured in an accident --> this sentence is meant to emphasize the abrupt
ending of tom's football career, due to the accident.
tom was a professional football player before his leg was injured in an accident --> the emphasis is on the fact that tom played pro football,
not on the way his career ended.

again, both correct.

by the way, people, you don't really have to understand these rhetorical differences. in the instance of this second problem, there are
actually two "correct" answers.

this is the danger of getting problems from random sources on the internet.

Ron,

So takeaway is.. BEFORE necessarily doesnot imply that use PAST PERFECT
Check the sense of the question and answer
Thanks
But please answer this one as well

Before its independence in 1947, Britain ruled India as a colony and they would relinquish power only after a long struggle by the native
people.

Before its independence in 1947, Britain ruled India as a colony and they would relinquish power
Before independence in 1947, Britain had ruled India as a colony and relinquished power
Before its independence in 1947, India was ruled by Britain as a colony and they relinquished power
Before independence in 1947, India had been ruled as a colony by Britain, which relinquished power
Before independence in 1947, India had been a colony of the British, who relinquished power

Here OA is E and the source is MGMAT...CAT 3


Here I took BEFORE as Simple Past ( as it shows some past time )//

In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997
they had spent nearly six hours a week.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

Here OA is B

How B ?

mmslf75 wrote:

Before its independence in 1947, Britain ruled India as a colony and they would relinquish power only after a long struggle by the native
people.

Before its independence in 1947, Britain ruled India as a colony and they would relinquish power
Before independence in 1947, Britain had ruled India as a colony and relinquished power
Before its independence in 1947, India was ruled by Britain as a colony and they relinquished power
Before independence in 1947, India had been ruled as a colony by Britain, which relinquished power
Before independence in 1947, India had been a colony of the British, who relinquished power

Here OA is E and the source is MGMAT...CAT 3


Here I took BEFORE as Simple Past ( as it shows some past time )//

in fact, i'd say that both tenses are fine on this one (for the same reason that both tenses are fine on the "beach resort / destruction"
problem, above). again, it's a matter of emphasis.

note that (e) is the only answer choice that is also correct in all other respects, though. so this question is not problematic like the other one.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Quote:
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997
they had spent nearly six hours a week.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

Here OA is B

How B ?

hmm. complicated.

tell ya what: best way to go here is to just memorize this as an idiom.

in clauses modified with "by TIME", you should use


the past perfect (had VERBed) if the time marker is in the past
the future perfect (will have VERBed) if the time marker is in the future
if the time marker is "by now", then you should use the present perfect, but that's unlikely to come up in a gmat problem.

so this is just an idiom.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

Quote:
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997
they had spent nearly six hours a week.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

Here OA is B

How B ?

hmm. complicated.

tell ya what: best way to go here is to just memorize this as an idiom.

in clauses modified with "by TIME", you should use


the past perfect (had VERBed) if the time marker is in the past
the future perfect (will have VERBed) if the time marker is in the future
if the time marker is "by now", then you should use the present perfect, but that's unlikely to come up in a gmat problem.

so this is just an idiom.


Thanks RON,
Query 1
But how does an event that occured in 1997 take PAST PERFECT, whereas an event that occured in 1981 takes PRESENT PERFECT ?
Query 2

I know why A is wrong .. IT cannot stand for PROFITS.


I will like to know when does one use INCREASED OR HAVE INCREASED here.?

"HAVE" stands for a present perfect.. indicating that the sentence was written immediately at the end of 3 months..(if so)
How does one know which option to pick here ?
Can you list some specifics for deciding on PRESENT PERFECT tense, as was done for PAST PERFECT above.

Link to question...
http://www.beatthegmat.com/company-profits-and-cost-cutting-measures-t14316.html

The results of the company's cost- cutting measures are evident in its profits, which increased five percent during the first three months of
this year after it fell over the last two years.
A. which increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it fell
B. which had increased five percent during the first three months of this year after it had fallen
C. which have increased five percent during the first three months of this year after falling
D. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after falling
E. with a five percent increase during the first three months of this year after
having fallen

OA is C

Secondly, "falling over last 2 years " is it acceptable ?

3:47 am

Quote
mmslf75 wrote:

Query 1
But how does an event that occured in 1997 take PAST PERFECT, whereas an event that occured in 1981 takes PRESENT PERFECT ?

idiomatic usage demands that you use the past perfect with "by 1997".

note also that these are two separate clauses; the second clause can actually stand on its own, with the verb in past perfect and 1997 as the
later time marker.
here's another example of the same thing:
As of 1991, Bob Beamon's long-jump world record had stood for 23 years.
this sentence is correct, even though there's no verb in the simple past tense; instead, 1991 itself serves as the second time marker.
because that time marker is there, you don't need a simple-past verb.

the same thing is going on in the correct answer here: we have TWO SEPARATE STATEMENTS. the first (the statement about 1981) is just a
statement about a statistic that was true at a certain point in time. the second (which can stand independently) is a statement in which the
past perfect is used before a time marker instead of a past-tense verb.

hope that helps.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano


Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions Ron en franais
Voit esitt kysymyksi Ron:lle mys suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Query 2

I know why A is wrong .. IT cannot stand for PROFITS.


I will like to know when does one use INCREASED OR HAVE INCREASED here.?

"HAVE" stands for a present perfect.. indicating that the sentence was written immediately at the end of 3 months..(if so)
How does one know which option to pick here ?

i addressed this above: in this problem, you simply don't have the context to choose one or the other. since we don't know when the
sentence was written, we can't decisively pick either option.
so, you'll just have to use some other criterion to eliminate.

takeaway:
NOT EVERY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANSWER CHOICES WILL LEAD TO AN ELIMINATION.
there are many instances in which there's a "split" between/among answer choices, but more than one version is correct. this is one such
instance.

Quote:
Can you list some specifics for deciding on PRESENT PERFECT tense, as was done for PAST PERFECT above.

see here
http://www.beatthegmat.com/comma-that-no-comma-which-t49361.html#210193

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Quote:

Secondly, "falling over last 2 years " is it acceptable ?

it's an official problem (from gmatprep), and "falling over the last two years" is in the correct answer. so... you already know the answer to
this question.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

lunarpower wrote:
mmslf75 wrote:

Query 1
But how does an event that occured in 1997 take PAST PERFECT, whereas an event that occured in 1981 takes PRESENT PERFECT ?

idiomatic usage demands that you use the past perfect with "by 1997".

note also that these are two separate clauses; the second clause can actually stand on its own, with the verb in past perfect and 1997 as the
later time marker.
here's another example of the same thing:
As of 1991, Bob Beamon's long-jump world record had stood for 23 years.
this sentence is correct, even though there's no verb in the simple past tense; instead, 1991 itself serves as the second time marker.
because that time marker is there, you don't need a simple-past verb.

the same thing is going on in the correct answer here: we have TWO SEPARATE STATEMENTS. the first (the statement about 1981) is just a
statement about a statistic that was true at a certain point in time. the second (which can stand independently) is a statement in which the
past perfect is used before a time marker instead of a past-tense verb.

hope that helps.

Oh that's a new thing I learnt today

Dont u think this is complicated a lil bit, i mean u require something more than basic knowledge to be able to differentiate between usage of
past perfect..
INDEED, A VERY GOOD EXPLANATION, THANKS MAN u ROCK

Please confirm the takeaways here, for bothe PAST PERFECT and PRESENT PERFECT

--------------------------------------------------------------- PAST PERFECT -------------------------------------------------

examples you cited here for past perfect and in other thread will fall under different types
Right ??????

1) If u see "BY <year> " use PAST PERFECT and the <year> is seen as a time marker, so serves purpose of SIMPLE PAST

EXAMPLE 1:: In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing
household chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
EXAMPLE 2:: As of 1991, Bob Beamon's long-jump world record had stood for 23 years.

2) When a process is described that persisted up some time in past

EXAMPLE 1:: In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing
household chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
EXAMPLE 2:: As of 1991, Bob Beamon's long-jump world record had stood for 23 years.

3) The end result of process that occurred in the past is important

EXAMPLE 1:: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendants,
popularly known as killer bees, had migratedas far north as southern Texas.
EXAMPLE 2:: Jesse had flown almost a million miles during those two years.
EXAMPLE 3 :: As of 1991, Bob Beamon's long-jump world record had stood for 23 years.

4) THE NORMAL USAGE ::


When you have a SIMPLE PAST present the other earlier action takes PAST PERFECT
EXAMPLE 1:: The train had departed by the time we arrived

-------------------------------- PRESENT PERFECT ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(1) events that have just ended/carryon / continue in the present

EXAMPLE :: I have been sick lately.

(2) past events that have some relevance to the present: DEPENDING on INTENT
EXAMPLE 1 :: i have been to argentina.
EXAMPLE 2 :: i went to argentina.
EXAMPLE 3 :: studies [b]have shown..." or "X has/have said that

(3) idioms that demand the present perfect


"Since X, ...", the following clause MUST be in the present perfect.[/b]

4:28 pm

Quote
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997
they had spent nearly six hours a week.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

Guys,

In the above question, one thing is sure that "had+verb" should come as the second event occurred after the first one.

So we can eliminate options C, D and E.

Now, A says that "they had spent nearly 6 hours a week" but it is the "average hours" which is compared in both this years and not the
"number of hours". This statement doesn't seem to give a valid comparison.

B correctly compares the "average" in 1981 to "average" in 1997 with the use of word "figure".

Hence 'B' is the best choice.

_________________
Hrishi

2009 10:52 pm

Quote
mms - your summary looks good. I like to think of present perfect as something that bridges past and present, and it's either still going on
or just simply still true today.

eg, I have been to Argentina

I'm not still there today, but it is still true today that I went there at some point. (Not really - I've never been to Argentina! And look what I
did there - I used present perfect again, because it was true in the past and is still true today. I have never been there.)

Another example:
The results of the study have shown that the more we study, the smarter we get.
The study is over - but the results are still true today, as indicated by usage of the present perfect tense.

_________________
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Quote

mmslf75 wrote:

Dont u think this is complicated a lil bit, i mean u require something more than basic knowledge to be able to differentiate between usage of
past perfect..

oh, sure. but that's the case in ALL languages.

think about your own language; the same is probably true. i.e., it's easy to tell which tense to use in most cases, but there will be cases in
which the rules for deciding between tenses are extremely elaborate and very difficult to explain.

verb tense tends to be the most nuanced, subtle point of grammar in most languages; english is no different in this respect.

--

your summary of points is pretty much accurate, yes.

_________________
Ron is a Director of Curriculum Development at Manhattan GMAT. He has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano


Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions Ron en franais
Voit esitt kysymyksi Ron:lle mys suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Hi Friends,

I'm consolidating a few questions on a particular concept (I have already explained this concept in a previous post, but I need a separate
post to consolidate all questions related to it) below. I will briefly explain the concept and then present a few questions. The reason I'm
doing this is because I found a lot of questions in Official paper test related to this concept.

In case this is post is not in accordance with the forum rules, I request the moderators to kindly let me know.
I hope this will help all fellow GmatClub members.

The concept -

Whenever something is in present tense, we use simple future tense.

Ex - The scientist BELIEVES that the machine WILL BE wonderful (This example is from Manhattan GMAT SC Guide)
Simple Present + Simple Future

If something is said in past, use a conditional tense and not simple future

Ex - The scientist BELIEVED that the machine WOULD BE wonderful.


Simple past + Conditional future

Examples (The questions might not necessarily test tenses, but please have a look at structure to understand this concept better)-

1. In 1860, the Philological Society launched its effort to create a dictionary more comprehensive than the world had ever seen; although
the project would take more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary had been born.

A) would take more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary had been
B) took more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary was
C) would take more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary was being
D) would take more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary was
E) took more than 60 years to complete, the Oxford English Dictionary was about to be

2. 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

3.Somber in tone and menacing in content, the leader of the terrorists who were holding the hostages sent a message leaving little hope
that they would be released by the end of the week.

(A) leader of the terrorists who were holding the hostages sent a message leaving little hope that they would be
(B) leader of the terrorists holding the hostages sent a message that left little hope for their being
(C) leader of the terrorists holding the hostages sent a message leaving little hope of the hostages being
(D) message sent by the leader of the terrorists who were holding the hostages left little hope that the hostages would be
(E) message that was sent by the leader of the terrorists who were holding the hostages left little hope for the hostages to be

Official Answers -
[Reveal] Spoiler:

_________________

I wanted to briefly disscuss the CONDITIONALS and the TENSES that practically give the wrong answers away... you might know it already,
but review is always helpful (feel free to add what you know on this matter)!
_____________________________________________________________
Conditional Sentences are known as Conditional Clauses or "If" Clauses. They are used to express that the action in the main clause
(without if) can only take place if a certain condition (in the clause with if) is fulfilled.

There are 3 Types of those:

Type 1
It is possible and also very likely that the condition will be fulfilled. We don't know for sure whether the condition actually will be
fulfilled or not, but the conditions seems rather realistic so we think it is likely to happen.

Formula: if + Simple Present, will-Future

Example: If I go to Ireland, I will visit Dublin.

Type 2
It is possible but very unlikely, that the condition will be fulfilled. Conditional Sentences Type II refer to situations in the present. An
action could happen if the present situation were different. I don't really expect the situation to change, however. I just imagine what
would happen if

Formula: if + Simple Past, Conditional I (= would + Infinitive)

Example: If I went to Ireland, I would visit Dublin. (I felt this one sounded kind of awkward, but I guess gramatically correct)

Type 3
It is impossible that the condition will be fulfilled because it refers to the past. Conditional Sentences Type III refer to situations in the
past. An action could have happened in the past if a certain condition had been fulfilled. Things were different then, however. We just
imagine, what would have happened if the situation had been fulfilled.

Formula: if + Past Perfect, Conditional II (= would + have + Past Participle)

Example: If I had gone to Ireland, I would have visited Dublin.

REMEMBER:
1)"WOULD/WILL" never appears in the "IF" clause and you can easily eliminate choices based on that fact!!!
2) If the tense is PRESENT SIMPLE, then, the condition is likely to be either PAST SIMPLE or FUTURE SIMPLE, NOT anything else, meaning
the tenses should be parallel (If PAST PERFECT -> Then PRESENT PERFECT) etc
3) Do NOT go by "what sounds right"... YOU WILL get it wrong... So if this subject is your weak area (like it was mine) never go by this
rule!
4) If I WERE blah..., the blah... many know this rule (i didn't, it thought it was SVA )

if you want practice quizzes, here is the link:


http://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/exercises_list/if.htm

please add more...

DISCLAIMER: some of you know that I am doing GMAX, but this is NOT their material... this is my own efforts of Google search to get more
info on the subject!

If or When? Which One to Use in a Sentence


by Rajat Sadana on January 8, 2015 in GMAT Verbal, Idioms, Sentence Correction

000

Usage of if or when is very tricky in GMAT Sentence Correction questions. In conditional statements, if and when can be

used interchangeably but only in certain cases. In certain other cases, using when instead of if will result in idiomatically

incorrect sentence.

In this post, I will explain when if and when can be used interchangeably and when they cannot be.

When in conditional statements can if and when be used inter-changeably?

If and when can be used interchangeably when we present conditions in which the outcome is definite or the outcome is a

general fact. i.e. if event A happens, event B happens.

Example 1 We know as a general fact that water evaporates when it is heated.

1. If you heat water, it evaporates. CORRECT


2. When you heat water, it evaporates. CORRECT
Example 2 We know based on past experience that Tom loses weight when he exercises.

1. Considering his past successes in losing weight, Tom knows that if he exercises, he loses weight. CORRECT
2. Considering his past successes in losing weight, Tom knows that when he exercises, he loses weight. CORRECT

When can you not use when in place of if in a sentence?

When if conditional statement is used to express a situation in which the outcome is a possibility and not a certainty, when

cannot be used in place of if.

Example 1 Possibility of going to fair

1. Morgans may go to the fair, if the weather is bright and sunny. CORRECT
2. Morgans may go to the fair, when the weather is bright and sunny. INCORRECT

Example 2 Tom is not certain if by exercising he will lose weight or not.

1. Considering his not so high success rate in losing weight, Tom knows that if he exercises, he may lose weight. CORRECT
2. Considering his not so high success rate in losing weight, Tom knows that when he exercises, he may lose weight. INCORRECT

How do you know if the conditional statement describes a definitive outcome or a


possibility?

The context of the sentence sets the tone of the conditional statement. In the examples for probable outcomes, the

sentence clearly states that Tom has not been very successful in losing weight. Thus, its only a possibility that he loses

weight upon exercising. Hence the conditional statement expresses a possibility and not a certainty.

How does GMAT test this concept in Sentence Correction questions?

In OG12 Question # 12, GMAT tests this concept. In 3 choices when is used to express a conditional statement in which

the outcome is a possibility. The correct choice uses if to correctly express the statement. For more details on this

question click here.

What are the key TAKE-AWAY messages?


1. If the conditional statement expresses a general fact if and when can be used interchangeably.
2. If the conditional statement expresses a possibility, when cannot be used in place of if.

To learn more about conditional statements covered in the e-GMAT SC course, register for the e-GMAT free trial and get

free access to GMAT concepts and hundreds of practice questions.


thanghnvn wrote:if I learned English, I got good score on gmat

you would use these tenses to describe actual sequences of observations from the past. this is a bit weird in this context, because
"learned english" is not really something that you can do in some cases but not in others.
here's an example that works better with these tenses:
if students in soviet russia showed mathematical or scientific aptitude, they were placed in specialized educational tracks from
a very young age.
--> this sentence relates actual past observations. if students showed these kinds of aptitude, they were placed in the programs; if
they didn't, they probably weren't.

if I learned English, I would get good score on gmat.


this tense combination does not relate actual observations; it's hypothetical. in the context of the sentence, you don't actually know
english yet, and are hypothesizing about the consequences of learning it if you decide to do so.

"would" has 2 main uses:

1 * it's the past tense of "will". i have no idea what the actual name of this tense is, but you can think of it as "a tense that WAS the future,
at that time in the past."
for instance:
Jim knows that his son will make the game-winning shot.
this sentence translates into the past tense as
Jim knew that his son would make the game-winning shot.

2 * it's a CONDITIONAL - i.e., it describes what would occur in some alternate situation that is not actually the case.
for instance:
if i were rich, i would buy my own island

Anda mungkin juga menyukai