gmat verbal

<do something> to <somebody's> satisfaction.

...

The study indicates more men are working in education, traditionally considered as a "female" profession.

"Indicates" ought to be followed by "that", and "considered as" is wrong. Corrected sentence: The study indicates that more men are working in education, traditionally considered a "female" profession.

The company is likely that it will gain market share.

"Is likely that it will" is wrong. Corrected sentence: The company is likely to gain market share

Because she has deep relationships with the unions like other leaders have, there is an expectation of her being appointed as chairperson.

"Like, there is an expectation of her being appointed," and "appointed as" are wrong. Corrected sentence: Because she has deep relationships with the unions as other leaders have, it is expected that she will be appointed chairperson.

Due to the highly sensitive nature of the court proceedings, the jury has been sequestered to prevent the leaking of information to the press. has been sequestered to prevent the leaking of information have been sequestered to prevent the leaking of information has been sequestered to prevent them from leaking information have been sequestered in an attempt to prevent them from leaking information has been sequestered to prevent the leaks of information from them

"The jury," a collective singular noun, requires a singular verb. The sentence correctly uses the singular "has been sequestered" to refer to the jury. (A) CORRECT. This choice correctly uses the singular "has been sequestered" to refer to "jury." (B) This choice incorrectly uses the plural "have been sequestered" to refer to the singular "jury." (C) This choice correctly uses the singular verb "has been sequestered," but incorrectly adds the plural pronoun "them" to refer to the singular "jury." (D) This choice incorrectly uses the plural "have been sequestered" to refer to the singular "jury." Additionally, the plural pronoun "them" incorrectly refers to the singular "jury," and the phrase "in an attempt" is awkward and unnecessary. (E) This choice incorrectly uses the plural pronoun "them" to refer to the singular "jury." Additionally, "the leaks" changes the original intent of the sentence by suggesting that specific leaks of information would be shared with the press.

To this day, researchers and theorists debate whether bubonic plague caused The Black Death, a pandemic that swept the world in the middle of the fourteenth century. whether whether or not about whether as to whether if

"Whether" is the most concise way to indicate that researchers and theorists are debating between alternative causes of the pandemic. (A) CORRECT. This sentence is correct as written for the reason stated above. (B) "Whether or not" is redundant; "whether" by itself indicates the full meaning. (C) "About whether" is both redundant and awkward. (D) "As to whether" is both redundant and awkward. (E) "If" is used to indicate a condition or a future possibility, but this sentence is not indicating either of these things. "Whether," which introduces a choice or an alternative, is the correct usage.

928. While Jackie Robinson was a Brooklyn Dodger, his courage in the face of physical threats and verbal attacks was not unlike that of Rosa Parks, who refused to move to the back of a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. (A) not unlike that of Rosa Parks, who refused (B) not unlike Rosa Parks, who refused (C) like Rosa Parks and her refusal (D) like that of Rosa Parks for refusing (E) as that of Rosa Parks, who refused

A

In the minds of many people living in England,before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes, the oppsite pole to civilization, an obscure and unimaginable place that wa considered the end of the world. (A) before Australia was Australia, it was the antipodes (B) before there was Australia, it was the antipodes (C) it was the antipodes that was Australia (D) Australia was what was the antipodes (E) Australia was what had been known as the antipodes

A pronoun split and no more than 1 verb in a clause.

Matt drivers fast cars LIKE his sister

Correct (=both drive fast cars, OR both drive fast cars in the same way) (Ch8 Sen Corr)

The movie THAT we watched last Friday was scary.

Correct.

That professor never gives anyone an A, but he did tell me that my papaer was more nearly perfect than any of my classmates'papers. Correct/Incorrect

Correct. More nearly perfect is a good way to descrive being closer to perfect than something else.

One of the zoo's foxes escaped from its cage

Correct. One here is simple a number, as in one fox. A fox is singular and is correctly referred to with the pronoun it.

The movie we watched last Friday was scary

Correct. That or whom can be dropped when the modified noun is the object of the modifying clause.

You can purchase tickets by phone or on the web

Correct. by and on are also parallel-the items in the list just have to be the same part of speech, not the exact same word. By phone and on the web are both prepositional phrases.

For all the rhetoric surrounding Earth Day, attendees at the event left behind tremendous quantities of trash. a. For all b. Given

Correct: A It is correct to begin a sentence with either "For all" or "Given," but the meanings are very different. "For all" means "despite." It links two sentence parts with opposite meanings. "Given" means "considering" or "since" (As in, "Since you're here, won't you help me lift these boxes?") It links two sentence parts with similar meanings. Since the rhetoric surrounding Earth Day is presumably the OPPOSITE of leaving trash everywhere, "For all" is the correct choice. The correct answer is A.

Choose A (keep the same) or B (change) in this one-split drill. The results of the profit-sharing plan exceeded expectations that employee retention increased dramatically. a. increased b. would increase

Correct: B This is a question about logical predication (also known as clarity of meaning or simply "making sense"). An "expectation" regards something that hasn't happened yet, so "would increase" makes sense. This is true even though the "expectation" is from the past, and the increase has already taken place. Here is another example: INCORRECT: I expected that you did it on time. CORRECT: I expected that you would do it on time. For a similar problem, see Official Guide 12th edition, Sentence Correction problem #16. The correct answer is B.

When the economy crashed, people began using foodstuffs and household goods as a means to barter. a. means to barter b. means of bartering

Correct: B This is an idioms question. "Means of" is the correct idiom. For instance, "He succeeded by means of hard work." Webster: means of : through the use of The correct answer is B.

Among the skills tested on the standardized tests given to military "pilots are orthographic imagination, the name given to the ability" to visualize the appearance of objects from different angles. a. pilots are orthographic imagination, the name given to the b. pilots is orthographic imagination, the c. pilots are orthographic imagination, which is the d. pilots, including orthographic imagination, the e. pilots include orthographic imagination, the

Correct: B This sentence contains a backward construction: the verb is/are precedes its subject. To tell that this is a backward construction, note that allof the words preceding the verb (Among the skills ... pilots) constitute one large prepositional phrase - a type of "middleman" - so that none of those words is eligible to be the subject. Therefore, the immediately following noun, orthographic imagination, must be the subject. This noun is singular, so is is the correct verb. In addition, the phrase the name given... placed next to orthographic projection doesn't make sense in context. The sentence should say that orthographic projection IS the ability to visualize the appearance of objects from different angles, not just the name of that ability. (If we were talking about the name, and not about the ability itself, then the name would have to be enclosed in quotes.) (A) This choice is incorrect, as it repeats the original sentence. (B) CORRECT. This backward construction correctly uses the singular verb is. Also,The sentence correctly states that orthographic imagination is the ability to visualize the appearance of objects from different angles. (C) The plural verb are should be is. (D) This is a sentence fragment: there is no main verb anywhere in the sentence. A main verb can't be within a prepositional phrase, so there is no main verb before pilots. Including is a participle, not a verb, and to visualize is an infinitive, not a verb. (E) Include is plural and thus does not agree with the singular subject orthographic imagination. Moreover, this sentence is illogical, because it uses both Among... and include(s) when only one of these may be used at a time. In other words, it is acceptable to say Among the skills is X, or to say The skills include X, but not Among the skills include X. The correct answer is B.

Verbs that take EITHER the Command Subjunctive OR the Infinitive

ask, beg, intend, order, prefer, urge, require (pay particular attention to require) We require THAT HE BE here We require HIM TO BE here.

Verbs that take ONLY the command subjunctive

demand, dictate, insist, mandate, propose, recommend, request, stipulate, suggest

Do Gmat online bank verbal problem

done?

Verbs that take ONLY the Infinitive

advise, allow, forbid, persuade, want

One group chose to do X and got a better result than a group that didn't do X. Therefore, X worked.

Causality: Self-selecting.

Right now, some things towards the end of their life cycle are better than some things towards the beginning of their life cycle. So the older things must have been better to start with.

Causality: Survivor bias.

In order to solve a problem, two things must happen. If one thing happens, the other one can't. (therefore, the solution cannot take place)

Causality: self-defeating plan.

Both elite cyclist and prof ballerinas are extremely athletic, and therefore you might assume that they have enough in common to warrant the same diet

Assumes Shared Belieft.

What are the adj? I know that this is a banausic concern, but six is my lucky number, so I am disappointed that I was only able to purchase five tickets for the raffle

Banausic, lucky, disappointed, five.

In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille, Vincent van Gogh's view of an iron ridge over the Rhone sold for $20.2million and it was the secnd highest price ever paid for a painting at auction. A: Rhone sold for $20.2million and it was B: Rhone, which sold for 20.2million, was C: Rhone, was sold for 20.2million, D: Rhone was sold for 20.2million, being E: Rhone, sold for 20.2million, and was

C

In Hungary, "as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of which are in" middle management and light industry. A. as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of which are in B. as with much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women works, many in C. as in much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many of them in. D. like much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women works, and many are. E. like much of Eastern Europe, an overwhelming proportion of women work, many are in.

C if you open a sentence with "like X, ..." then the following two things must be true: 1 * X is a noun (or something else that can function as a noun, such as a gerund, noun-type phrase, etc). in other words, X should not be a clause 2 * you INTEND a COMPARISON between X and the SUBJECT of the following sentence. if these 2 things are not true, you can't use "like". in choice (e), the second of these is not true, because the SUBJECT is not "hungary". the subject is "an overwhelming proportion of women". that's not a sensible comparison. -- in particular, you can't use "like" with prepositional phrases. in that case, you have to use "as", as in the correct answer. (hey, i did it in that sentence, too. and not even on purpose. sweeeeeeet) -- also note that (e) is a run-on sentence, since the part starting with "many are in..." is a sentence in its own right. you can't have two complete sentences (independent clauses) linked together with only a comma.

While the United States Constitution specifies "that a person cannot be elected President more than twice, it did not specify if someone who has already been elected President twice would" still be eligible to run for Vice President. a. that a person cannot be elected President more than twice, it did not specify if someone who has already been elected President twice b. that a person cannot be elected President more than two times, it does not specify if a former President who was elected twice c. that a person cannot be elected President more than twice, it does not specify whether someone who has already been elected President twice d. a person not to be elected President more than two times, it does not specify whether a twice-elected President e. a person not to be elected President more than twice, it does not specify if someone who has already been elected President twice

Correct: C The first main verb (specifies) is in present tense, but the second main verb (did not specify) is in past tense. We should not change the tense unless the meaning of the sentence dictates such a change; in this case, there is no reason to change to past tense, so the correct sentence should maintain the original, non-underlined tense: present. The original sentence also uses the word if to introduce the clause someone who has already... Vice President. If is used to introduce "if-then" type statements, but this statement does not have a "then" counterpart. Rather, this statement is discussing whether one of two things would be true: either someone is still eligible or someone is not still eligible. The correct idiom to introduce this clause is whether. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) The choice repeats the original idiom error using if; the word whether is the correct idiom to introduce the final clause. (C) CORRECT. This choice corrects the original tense error by changing did not specify to does not specify. The choice also corrects the original idiom error by substituting the word whether for the word if. (D) The verb specify should not be followed by an object (a person), then an infinitive (to be). One cannot specify a person not to be elected; one must specify that a person cannot be elected. (E) The verb specify should not be followed by an object (a person), then an infinitive (to be). One cannot specify a person not to be elected; one must specify that a person cannot be elected. Finally, the choice repeats the original idiom error using "if"; the word "whether" is the correct idiom to introduce the final clause. The correct answer is C.

Metals, pigments and other chemical substances used by ancient cultures were not always benign, "as the use of toxic lead by ancient Romans in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—of both their aqueducts and their private homes demonstrate." a. the use of toxic lead by ancient Romans in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—of both their aqueducts and their private homes demonstrate b. demonstrated by the use of toxic lead in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—both of their aqueducts and their private homes by ancient Romans c. demonstrated by the toxic lead that ancient Romans used in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—of both their aqueducts and their private homes d. toxic lead used by ancient Romans in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—both of their aqueducts and of their private homes demonstrate e. the use by ancient Romans of toxic lead in the plumbing—a word derived from the Latin word for "lead"—of both their aqueducts and private homes demonstrates

Correct: C The original sentence incorrectly pairs a singular subject (the use) with a plural verb (demonstrate). Don't be misled by the distance between these two; everything between them is a modifier. In fact, the distance between use and demonstrate is so extreme that it's easy to forget that use needs a verb. The correct choice should avoid this problem. (A) This choice is incorrect, as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This choice fixes the subject-verb agreement problem (and the problem of distance) by changing the beginning to demonstrated by the use. However, it introduces two new problems. First, parallelism is broken in the phrase both of their aqueducts and their private homes. The first marker word (both) is followed by of their, but the second marker word (and) is followed directly by their. The proper form would be both of their... and of their... or of both their... and their.... Second, the prepositional phrase by the Romans is so far removed from the noun it goes with (use) that we lose track of the meaning. (C) CORRECT. This answer choice fixes all grammatical problems. Verbs are placed close to their natural subjects (demonstrated by the toxic lead, ancient Romans used). Also, the parallelism of the both... and... construction at the end of the sentence is proper. It could be argued that the meaning has shifted ever so slightly (this choice states that the toxic lead itself demonstrates the point, rather than the use of that toxic lead), but we are left with no other choice, and a meaning shift of this minute degree is tolerable. (D) This choice introduces a subject-verb disagreement: toxic lead... demonstrate. Moreover, these two (subject and verb) are still separated by an enormous distance, with many distracting elements in between. (E) This choice still has a parallelism issue in the both their aqueducts and private homes. If both is followed by their, then and should be followed by their, too. Also, the separation of the modifier of toxic lead from the use creates a meaning problem, because this modifier seems to attach to ancient Romans. The correct answer is C.

We Propose THAT the school board DISBAND

Correct: Command Subjunctive P113 (sent corr)

We allow HIM TO BE here

Correct: advise, allow, forbid, persuade, want

We demand THAT HE BE here

Correct: demand, dictate, insist, mandate, propose, recommend, request, stipulate, suggest

The security chief demande that the lead be found and stepped.

Correct: subjunctive modde

The columnist asserted that the reason for the bill's failure WAS BECAUSE OF pressure from rich donors to the campaigns of politicians voting on the bill. a. was because of b. was

Correct: was It is redundant and incorrect to use "reason" and "because" together. Use only one or the other. Here is a shortened example: CORRECT: The REASON for the bill's failure was pressure from donors. CORRECT: The bill failed BECAUSE of pressure from donors. INCORRECT: The REASON the bill failed is BECAUSE of pressure from donors. The correct answer is B.

We require THAT HE BE here We require HIM TO BE here

Correct: word that takes either ask, beg, intend, order, prefer, urge, require (pay particular attention to require)

A report by the American Academy for the Advancement of Science has concluded that much of the currently uncontrolled dioxins to which North Americans are exposed comes from the incineration of wastes. (A) much of the currently uncontrolled dioxins to which North Americans are exposed comes (B) much of the currently uncontrolled dioxins that North Americans are exposed to come (C) much of the dioxins that are currently uncontrolled and that North Americans are exposed to comes (D) many of the dioxins that are currently uncontrolled and North Americans are exposed to come (E) many of the currently uncontrolled dioxins to which North Americans are exposed come

E

* "Recently documented examples of neurogenesis, the production of new brain cells, include "the brain growing in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or neurons increasing in canaries that" learn new songs. "(A) the brain growing in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or neurons increasing in canaries that "(B) mice whose brains grow when they are placed in a stimulating environment or canaries whose neurons increase when they "(C) mice's brains that grow when they are placed in a stimulating environment or canaries' neurons that increase when they "(D) the brain growth in mice when placed in a stimulating environment or the increase in canaries' neurons when they "(E) brain growth in mice that are placed in a stimulating environment or an increase in neurons in canaries that"

E)

To overcome my fear of germs, I will think about disease "as though it WERE harmless"

Hypothetical Subjunctive. Verb "to be", the form "WERE" is always used.

While the stock market was bouncing back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession; between 2001 to 2004, typical household savings plummeted nearly 25% and the median household debt rose by a third. was bouncing back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession; between bounced back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession, from has bounced back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession; between has bounced back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession; from bounced back from its 2002 low, U.S. families are still reeling from the recent recession; from

In the original sentence, "While the stock market was bouncing back" implies that something else was taking place simultaneously in the past, but the rest of the sentence is in present tense ("U.S. families are still reeling"). In addition, the phrasing "between 2001 to 2004" is incorrect; the correct idiom is either "between X and Y" or "from X to Y" (and, in this case, we must use "from X to Y" since only the first word is underlined). (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) "While the stock market bounced back" implies that the next action took place simultaneously in the past, but the next verb ("are still reeling") is in the present tense. In addition, this is a run-on sentence; the comma after the word "recession" should be a semi-colon. (C) This sentence incorrectly uses "between X to Y." The correct idiom must be "from X to Y." (D) CORRECT. This choice remedies the mis-matched tenses by pairing the present perfect "has bounced back," which indicates an action began in the past and has continued into the present, with the present tense "are still reeling." In addition, it uses the correct idiom ("from X to Y"). (E) "While the stock market bounced back" implies that the next action took place simultaneously in the past, but the next verb ("are still reeling") is in the present tense.

According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there were 198,113 female science and engineering graduate students, almost 42% of the graduate students in those fields, twice as much as 1981. twice as much as 1981 twice as many as 1981 double the figure for 1981 double what it was in 1981 a number double that of 1981's

In the original sentence, "much" incorrectly references the quantity of female graduate students. Students are countable, so "many" is the correct term. Additionally, "as 1981" incorrectly completes the comparison, illogically comparing the number of people (the "198,113 female science and engineering graduate students") to a year ("1981"). (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) "As 1981" incorrectly completes the comparison, illogically comparing the number of people (the "198,113 female science and engineering graduate students") to a year ("1981"). (C) CORRECT. "Double the figure" places the emphasis on the number of female graduate students, and correctly completes the comparison between the number of people in one year (198,133 in 2003) and the number of people in another year (the figure for 1981). (D) "What it was" is wordy, awkward, and unclear. The singular pronoun "it" has no clear antecedent. (E) "Double that of 1981's" is wordy, awkward, and unclear. The singular pronoun "that" has no clear antecedent. The possessive "1981's" is not followed by a noun to possess.

Though it is now universally accepted that William Shakespeare was a real, historical person - which was once considered questionable - some still suspect him not to have written all of the works attributed as his own. Though it is now universally accepted that William Shakespeare was a real, historical person - which was once considered questionable - some still suspect him not to have written all of the works attributed as his own. Though William Shakespeare is now universally accepted to be a real, historical person - once considered as questionable - some still suspect him not to have written all of the works attributed to be his own. William Shakespeare - now universally accepted as a real, historical person, though even this fact was once considered questionable - who is still suspected, by some, not to have written all of the works attributed to him. Though it is now universally accepted that William Shakespeare was a real, historical person - a fact that was once considered questionable - he is still suspected, by some, of not having written all of the works attributed to him. Some still suspect that William Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed as his own, although it is now universally accepted that he was a real, historical person - a fact that was once considered questionable.

In the original sentence, the relative pronoun "which" must stand for the nearest noun or noun phrase preceding the comma or dash, but we cannot refer to a "person" with the pronoun "which." Rather, the pronoun "who" would have to be used, if that were the intended meaning (though that meaning itself would be illogical). Logically, the fact that "Shakespeare was a real person" (a clause) was in question. Additionally, the original sentence contains two incorrect idioms: "attributed as his own" (the correct idiom is "X is attributed to Y"), and "suspect ... not to have written" (the correct idioms are "suspect that..." and "suspect X of VERBing"). (A) This choice is incorrect for the reasons described in the paragraph above. (B) This choice contains four idiom errors: "accepted to be...", "attributed to be...", "considered as...", and, finally, "suspected not to have..." (the last of which is also present in the original). In addition, it is unclear what is being modified by the modifier "once considered as questionable", which appears to indicate that the "real, historical person" himself was once considered questionable. (C) The main part of the sentence - not the part between the dashes - is not a complete sentence. There is no verb to match the subject William Shakespeare. Additionally, there is no change of tense in the first clause (i.e., Shakespeare's existence is not indicated by any past-tense verb); since the timeframe of the rest of that clause is "now", this construction illogically suggests that Shakespeare is now a real, historical person (i.e., that he is still alive). Finally, the original idiom error "suspected not to have..." has not been corrected. (D) CORRECT. All of the idiom errors in the original sentence have been corrected: "accepted", "considered", "suspected", and "attributed" are all used in properly idiomatic forms. Additionally, the modifier set off by dashes very clearly indicates which fact is being described, and the use of an appositive ("a fact that...") allows the modifier to refer to the entire idea of the previous clause, as required by context. (E) This choice preserves the incorrect idiomatic usage of "attributed as..." from the original. In addition, the placement of the modifier at the end of this sentence makes it unclear exactly which fact was once considered questionable; this appositive could conceivably refer either to "it is now universally accepted that he was a real, historical person" (the intended referent) or to "some still suspect that William Shakespeare did not write all of the works attributed as his own".

WE PROPOSE THAT the school board WILL DISBAND

Incorrect

We PROPOSE THAT the school board DISBANDS.

Incorrect

We PROPOSE THAT the school board IS TO DISBAND

Incorrect

We PROPOSE THAT the school board SHOULD DISBAND

Incorrect

Firefighters should always secure one's safety gear before rushing into a fire

Incorrect. Firefighters is plural and cannot mix with one's. A correct version would say their safety gear

We Propose the school board DISBAND

Incorrect: THAT is not optional

More unique Correct/Incorrecr

Incorrect: Unique is an absolute Adjective (i.e. dead) and should be avoided in formal English. You cannot describe more dead.

I pronounce "tomato" one way, you pronounce it a completely different way.

Incorrect: comma splice. Two independent clauses joined by only a comma. Correct: I pronounce "tomato" one way, while you pronounce it a completely different way. Correct: I pronounce "tomato" one way; you pronounce it a completely different way.

The ostensible reason for Anne Boleyn's execution was because of adultery, although the charges were almost certainly fabricated wholesale.

Reason... because is wrong. Corrected sentence: The ostensible reason for Anne Boleyn's execution was adultery....

"X is because Y"

Right

The reason X is that Y

Right

The security guard WHOM we met was nice

Right

The agency PROHIBITED Gary FROM WORKING on weekends

Right.

It is used to express a wish, emotion, possibility, or action that has not yet occurred, as I wish you were mine or I suggest that you be on time

Subjunctive mood.

His demand THAT he BE paid full severance was not met

The Command Subjunctive can also be used with nouns derived from Bossy Verbs, such as a demand or a request

While political discourse and the media in the United States have focused on the rise of job outsourcing, few have mentioned the sharp fall of talent "insourcing," or the drop in enrollment of foreign-born graduate students since 2001, and its dire results. The decrease in such insourcing will hurt America's competitiveness in basic research and applied technology, with serious consequences for years to come. The de-internationalization of graduate programs across the country will also negatively affect the global outlook and experience of the American students remaining in those programs; they will not have the opportunity to learn about foreign cultures directly from members of those cultures. What distinguishes the decline of talent insourcing from the rise of job outsourcing is that the former can be easily rectified by a policy change of the United States government. The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in evaluating the author's claim regarding the impact of decreased insourcing in America? What is the cost to reverse the trend of insourcing in America? How does insourcing replace domestic jobs lost from outsourcing? Since 2001, what has been the decrease in the number of foreign-born students in America? What opportunities do American graduate students have to interact regularly with foreigners who are not students? What effect would a government policy have on the number of foreign graduate students?

The author claims that the "decrease in such insourcing will hurt America's competitiveness in basic research and applied technology, with serious consequences for years to come." In addition, the author claims that the decline in insourcing will "negatively affect the global outlook and experience of American students" because they will "not have the opportunity to learn about foreign cultures directly from members of those cultures." We are asked to find a question whose answer would provide information useful to evaluating the claims of the argument. (A) The focus of the argument is not on the financial costs of insourcing. (B) The focus of the argument is not on how insourcing can compensate for outsourcing. (C) The focus of the argument is not on the specific numbers of foreign-born students, but on the decline in their number instead. (D) CORRECT. The argument assumes that the students will not have contact with foreigners through channels other than school. This choice asks whether the students have such contact elsewhere. If the answer to this question is "yes", the author's claims carry less weight. (E) A government policy might have an effect on insourcing, but it would not necessarily have an effect on the specific claims of the argument.

The doctor told me I had a heart attack correct/incorrect if incorrect, what should be changed?

The doctor told me I had had a heart attack. The speaker had had a heart attack before the doctor told him about it.

A recent and popular self-help book wryly notes that if adolescence was not so painful, it would have a droll comedic aspect, at least in retrospect. was not so painful, it was not so painful, they were not so painful, they were not so painful, it were not so painful, being one

The original contains a verb mood error. "If adolescence was" is improper subjunctive. "Was" should not be used in an "if" clause indicating a hypothetical condition. "If adolescence were" is correct. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This choice has a verb mood error. "Was" should not be used in an "if" clause indicating a hypothetical condition; "were" would be correct. Also, the plural "they" can not refer to the singular "adolescence." (C) This choice correctly employs the subjunctive mood by stating "if adolescence were." However, the plural "they" can not refer to the singular "adolescence." (D) CORRECT. The "if" clause properly uses the subjunctive mood, "if adolescence were." The singular "it" refers to the singular "adolescence." (E) This choice correctly employs the subjunctive mood by stating "if adolescence were." However, "being one" is wordy and awkward; using "it" is preferable. "Being" is virtually always wordy and incorrect.

The reason X is because Y

Wrong

The security guard WHO we met was nice

Wrong

having had = Past Perfect?

Yes

Though most people take it for granted now, the nationwide admission of students to colleges and universities based on academic merit is a relatively recent phenomenon, beginning only after World War II. Though most people take it for granted now, the nationwide admission of students to colleges and universities based on academic merit Though it is now taken for granted by most people, the admission of nationwide students to colleges and universities based on academic merit Now taken for granted by most people, colleges and universities admitting students based on their academic merit Most take them for granted now, but the admission of nationwide students to colleges and universities based on their academic merit Most people now take for granted that colleges and universities admit students nationally based on academic merit, and it

The original sentence begins with an opening modifier that correctly modifies the nationwide admission of students. (A) CORRECT. This choice is correct as it repeats the original sentence. (B) The use of the initial modifier in this choice is correct. However, the adjective "nationwide" is incorrectly applied to students, when it is meant to apply to the admission process. (C) Here, the modifier is adjacent to the subject "colleges and universities," incorrectly suggesting that colleges and universities are taken for granted as opposed to the admission process. (D) This sentence incorrectly uses the pronoun "them" to refer to the "admission" which is a singular subject. The use of the pronoun "their" is also unclear as the antecedent could be construed to be "colleges and universities" as opposed to the intended antecedent, "students." (E) Using the word "and" at the end of the underline makes the meaning of this sentence less clear by failing to draw an appropriate contrast between the current state of taking the nationwide admission of students for granted and the fact that it is a relatively recent phenomenon. A more appropriate word choice would be "but": "Most people now take for granted..., but it is a relatively recent phenomenon."

Based on recent box office receipts, the public's appetite for documentary films, like nonfiction books, seems to be on the rise. like nonfiction books as nonfiction books as its interest in nonfiction books like their interest in nonfiction books like its interest in nonfiction books

The original sentence contains a faulty comparison. "Nonfiction books" is either illogically compared to "the public's appetite," or improperly used to suggest that "nonfiction books" are examples of "documentary films." The proper comparison should be between the public's "appetite" for x and its "appetite" for y. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) In this choice, "nonfiction books" is illogically compared to the public's "appetite." The proper comparison should be between the public's "appetite" for x and its "appetite" for y. Moreover, the use of the comparison word "as" is incorrect. "As" is used to compare verb phrases, not nouns; in this case, two nouns ("appetite" and "interest") are compared so the comparison word "like" should be used instead. (C) This choice logically compares the public's "appetite" for documentary films to its "interest" in nonfiction books. However, the use of the comparison word "as" is incorrect. "As" is used to compare verb phrases, not nouns; in this case, two nouns ("appetite" and "interest") are compared so the comparison word "like" should be used instead. (D) This choice logically compares the public's "appetite" for documentary films to its "interest" in nonfiction books. However, this choice incorrectly uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular noun "the public." (E) CORRECT. This choice logically compares the public's "appetite" for documentary films to its "interest" in nonfiction books.

It was not long after the 1930s commenced that such baritone singers as Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo contributed to the popularization of a type of romantic, soothing singing that came to be called "crooning." It was not long after the 1930s commenced that such baritone singers as Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo contributed to Not long after the commencement of the decade of the 1930s, baritone singers such as Bing Crosby and also Russ Columbo decided to contribute in Not long after the 1930s commenced, baritone singers like Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo contributed to Not long after the beginning of the 1930s commencement, baritone singers like Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo had contributed to It was not long after the 1930s commenced that baritone singers such as Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo had contributed in

The original sentence correctly uses the simple past tense "contributed" to refer to an event that occurred in the past. Furthermore, the original sentence correctly uses "such as" to refer to specific baritone singers who made a contribution to the popularization of the "crooning" style of singing. (A) CORRECT. As explained above, this choice uses the proper verb tense and is idiomatically correct. (B) This choice is wordy, awkward, and redundant. Since the 1930s is a decade, there is no reason to state "of the decade." Similarly, if baritone singers such as Bing Crosby and Russ Columbo contributed, it is unnecessary to say they "decided" to contribute. Furthermore, this choice makes two errors in idiomatic construction: the "and also" construction is unidiomatic - the word "also" should be eliminated, and "contribute in" should be "contribute to." (C) This choice uses the unidiomatic "like" to refer to specific baritone singers. On the GMAT, "like" means "similar to," while "such as" refers to specific examples. (D) Stating "the beginning of the 1930s commencement" is redundant, since "beginning" and "commencement" are synonyms. Furthermore, this choice incorrectly uses "like" instead of the idiomatic "such as" to refer to specific baritone singers. Finally, it incorrectly shifts to the past perfect "had contributed," which would only be correct if they "had contributed" prior to some other action in the simple past tense; here there is no such simple past tense verb. (E) In this choice, "contributed in" is unidiomatic; the proper construction is "contributed to." Furthermore, this choice incorrectly uses the past perfect "had contributed," which would only be correct if they "had contributed" prior to some other action in the simple past tense, such as "the 1930s commenced." This verb tense usage reverses the intended order of events: this choice clearly indicates that they contributed "not long after" the 1930s commenced.

A recent study has cited overcomplexity, increasing worker mobility between companies, and poor financial planning in estimating that fewer than half of eligible American workers had contributed the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans. A recent study has cited overcomplexity, increasing worker mobility between companies, and poor financial planning in estimating that fewer than half of eligible American workers had contributed the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans. Overcomplexity, increasing worker mobility between companies, and poor financial planning have been cited by a recent study that estimated that over half of eligible American workers do not contribute the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans. Citing overcomplexity, increasing mobility of workers between companies, and poor financial planning, less than half of eligible American workers had contributed the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans, a recent study estimates. A recent study of American workers, citing overcomplexity, increasing mobility of workers between companies, and poor financial planning, has estimated that fewer than half of eligible American workers had contributed the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans. Citing overcomplexity, increasing mobility of workers between companies, and poor financial planning, a recent study has estimated that fewer than half of eligible American workers contribute the maximum amount to their employer-offered retirement plans.

The original sentence incorrectly utilizes the past perfect tense in its use of "had contributed." The past perfect tense demands that the simple past tense also be used in the sentence to refer to another action that occurred in the past but after the action referred to by the past perfect tense. Here, the sentence uses the present perfect tense "has cited" and the present participle "estimating," but does not use the simple past tense to refer to another action in the later past. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This choice is awkward in its use of the structure "Overcomplexity, increasing mobility . . . , and poor financial planning . . .have been cited" as this structure leads to the use of the passive voice, which is less preferable than the active voice. It is also problematic in its use of both the past tense "estimated" and the present perfect tense "have been cited" to refer to the recent study; the verb tenses should be consistent in their treatment of the study. (C) This choice incorrectly places the modifying phrase "Citing overcomplexity, increasing mobility . . . and poor financial planning" adjacent to "less than half of American workers," incorrectly suggesting that it is less than half of American workers, and not a recent study, that cites these factors as causes for a lack of contribution to retirement plans. This choice also repeats the original verb tense error with "had contributed." (D) This choice repeats the original verb tense error with "had contributed." (E) CORRECT. This choice correctly uses both the present participle ("Citing . . .") and the present perfect ("has estimated") to refer to the recent study, as well as the present tense "contribute" in reference to the study findings. The phrase "Citing overcomplexity, increasing mobility . . . , and poor financial planning," is correctly used here as a modifier for "a recent study."

Recent studies suggest that an intake of vitamin E in excess of that found naturally in a balanced diet may actually increase the risk of developing certain illnesses, despite the claims of thousands of people who swear by it as a dietary supplement. Recent studies suggest that an intake of vitamin E in excess of that found naturally in a balanced diet may actually increase the risk of developing certain illnesses Recent studies suggest that taking vitamin E in excess of that found naturally in a balanced diet actually increases the risk of developing certain illnesses Certain illnesses may be at a higher risk of development if vitamin E is taken in excess of a balanced diet, according to recent studies According to recent studies, the intake of vitamin E, if in excess of that found naturally in a balanced diet, may actually increase developing certain illnesses Vitamin E, recent studies suggest, if in excess of that found naturally in a balanced diet, may actually increase the development risk of certain illnesses

The original sentence is clear, and is phrased in the most economical way. (A) CORRECT. This choice is correct as it repeats the original sentence. (B) The phrase "actually increases" has a stronger meaning than the author intended - that high vitamin E consumption "may actually increase" certain risks. (C) The phrasing of "certain illnesses may be at a higher risk" is awkward and has an unintended meaning. It is not the illnesses that are at higher risk, but rather people who consume too much vitamin E. In addition, the placement of the modifying phrase "according to recent studies" is awkward, seemingly referring to a "balanced diet" when it should be modifying vitamin E intake. Finally, "if vitamin E is taken in excess of a balanced diet" should read "if vitamin E is taken in excess of that (vitamin E) found naturally in a balanced diet." (D) "The intake of vitamin E...may actually increase developing certain illnesses" is awkward and has an unintended meaning. It would be more accurate to state that excess intake of vitamin E may increase the risk of developing certain illnesses. Even if this choice had the correct meaning, the choice of words would still have been faulty: it should read "increase the development of certain illnesses" not "increase developing certain illnesses." (E) "Vitamin E...may actually increase the development risk of certain illnesses" is awkward and has an unintended meaning. It would be more accurate to state that excess intake of vitamin E may actually increase the risk. Additionally, "the development risk of certain illnesses" is misleading; it should be "the risk of (a person) developing certain illnesses."

During the past decade, the labor market in France has not been operating according to free market principles, but instead stifling functioning through its various government regulations restricting the hiring and firing of workers. principles, but instead stifling functioning through its various government regulations restricting the hiring and firing of workers principles, instead it has been functioning in a stifled manner as a result of various government regulations that restrict the hiring and firing of workers principles, rather functioning despite being stifled as a result of government regulations that variously restrict worker hiring and firing principles; the hiring and firing of workers is restricted there by various government regulations, its functioning being stifled principles; instead, its functioning has been stifled by various government regulations restricting the hiring and firing of workers

The original sentence is problematic in its use of the possessive pronoun "its." The antecedent to "its" is the "labor market," which incorrectly and illogically suggests that the labor market is somehow possessing or passing government regulations itself. In addition, the original sentence incorrectly uses active rather than passive voice to describe the effects imposed on the "labor market" by government regulations, thus illogically suggesting that the "labor market" itself is stifling functioning, rather than being stifled by other forces. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This choice incorrectly uses a comma to connect two independent clauses, thus creating a run-on sentence. Two independent clauses must be connected either by a conjunction, such as "and" or "but," or by a semicolon. (C) This choice incorrectly uses "stifled" to modify the labor market itself, as opposed to its functioning. Also, "variously restrict" is awkward; various is used more appropriately to modify "government regulations," rather than the manner in which the regulations restrict worker hiring and firing. (D) In order to properly use a semicolon, both the clause before and after the semicolon must be independent clauses or sentences, and the clauses must be closely related in meaning. In this choice, the underlined portion, though grammatically correct, does not stand alone as an effective independent clause. Also, the pronoun "its" lacks a clear antecedent. (E) CORRECT. This answer choice correctly uses the semicolon to connect two independent but closely related clauses. In addition, the pronoun "its" clearly and unambiguously refers to the "labor market."

Noting that the price of oil and other fuel components, a major factor in the cost structure of an airline, have risen and will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about their outlook for the upcoming quarter. have risen and will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about their have risen and will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about the will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about the has risen and will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about their will continue to rise, the company management was pessimistic about their

The original sentence supplies the plural verb construction "have risen" for the singular subject "price." Further, the phrase "have risen and will continue to rise" is redundant. Finally, the original sentence uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular subject "management." (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This answer corrects the pronoun issue, but suffers from the lack of agreement between the subject "the price" and the verb "have risen." This answer choice also retains the redundant and wordy construction "have risen and will continue to rise." (C) CORRECT. This answer replaces the redundant construction "have risen and will continue to rise" with the more concise "will continue to rise." This change is possible without any loss of content, since using "will continue to rise" already implies that the price of oil and fuel components has been increasing to date. Further, this modification resolves the subject-verb agreement issue in the original sentence. Finally, this answer choice replaces the plural pronoun "their" with the article "the," thus remedying the original lack of agreement between the noun "management" and pronoun "their." (D) While supplying the appropriate singular verb "has risen" for the singular subject "the price," this choice is wordy and retains the incorrect pronoun "their" from the original sentence. (E) While resolving the issues of redundancy and subject-verb agreement, this answer uses the plural pronoun "their" to refer to the singular noun "management."

Many financial analysts consider an upward trend in a firm's current ratio a sign of improving liquidity. a sign of as a sign of to be a sign of a sign of their as being a sign of

The original sentence uses the correct idiom "to consider X Y" and draws a logical and structurally parallel comparison between two nouns: "a trend" and "a sign." (A) CORRECT. This answer choice is correct as it repeats the original sentence. (B) This answer choice uses the unidiomatic construction "to consider X as Y." (C) This answer choice uses the unidiomatic and redundant construction "to consider X to be Y." (D) This answer choice uses the proper idiomatic construction "to consider X Y" but introduces the plural pronoun "their," which illogically refers to the plural noun "analysts" rather than the company. (E) This answer choice uses the unidiomatic construction "to consider X as being Y."

Municipal governments are beginning to confront the growing pension liabilities; this leads local politicians throughout the country to become increasingly vocal about restraining costs and limiting services. a) the growing pension liabilities; this leads b) their growing pension liabilities; leading c) the growth in their pension liabilities, which leads d) their growing pension liabilities, leading e) their growing pension liabilities, that leads

The original sentence utilizes a semicolon, the proper use of which has two requirements: 1. The clauses before and after the semicolon must be able to function as independent sentences; and 2. the clauses must be closely related in terms of subject matter. Here, the second clause refers back to the first clause, both requirements are satisfied, and the semicolon is used properly. However, the GMAT doesn't permit the use of "this" as a pronoun (without a noun following), since "this" by itself has no clear antecedent. The author clearly wants to refer to the entire action of the first clause (the fact that municipal governments are confronting these liabilities), but "this" cannot do so. Additionally, "the growing pension liabilities" in the 1st part of the sentence is incorrect in its use of the article "the," as the pension liabilities were not referenced earlier in the sentence. Finally, the verb form in the second clause is nonparallel to the verb form in the 1st clause ("beginning . . . leads"). Though the lack of parallelism is grammatically permissible between two independent clauses, the construction is awkward. (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) Here, the plural pronoun "their" is used correctly, referring to the plural antecedent "municipal governments." However, the second clause "leading local politicians . . ." does not function as an independent sentence, making the use of the semicolon improper. (C) "Which" is used improperly in this choice. The intention of the author is to have the entire action of the first clause act as the subject of "leads," not just the "pension liabilities." "Which" cannot refer to the entire action prior. Moreover, the verbs are not parallel ("beginning . . . leads"). As a result, the second part of the sentence is awkward and incorrect, as the use of a comma instead of a semicolon means that both verbs now appear in the same sentence. (D) CORRECT. The form "leading" indicates that the whole action of the first part of the sentence is what is "leading" in the second part of the sentence. Moreover, the plural pronoun "their" is properly used to refer to the plural antecedent "municipal governments." (E) "That" is used improperly This answer choice is problematic because the verbs are not parallel ("beginning . . . leads"). As a result the second part of the sentence is awkward and incorrect, as the use of a comma instead of a semicolon means that both verbs now appear in the same sentence.

Unlike modern irrigation techniques, in which water is carefully distributed in small amounts rather than allowed to flow freely, the ancient Romans created systems of canals that often flooded and thus wasted water. the ancient Romans created systems of canals that often the irrigation methods of the ancient Romans consisted of systems of canals that often the ancient Roman irrigation methods often were systems of canals that flooded the ancient Romans had canal systems for irrigation that were often the methods of ancient Roman irrigation were systems of canals that often

The sentence begins with a comparison: "Unlike modern irrigation techniques". But it compares those techniques to "the ancient Romans." This is not a valid comparison. Since we cannot change the comparison, we must find a choice that offers something that can logically be compared to irrigation techniques. (A) This is choice is the same as the original sentence. (B) CORRECT. This choice correctly compares irrigation techniques to irrigation techniques. (C) While this sentence correctly compares irrigation techniques, it awkwardly states that the Roman methods "were" systems of canals. In contrast, choice B more accurately states that the Roman methods "consisted" of systems of canals. (D) This choice illogically compares irrigation techniques to the ancient Romans. (E) Like choice C, this sentence correctly compares irrigation techniques, but it also awkwardly states that the Roman methods "were" systems of canals.

According to a recent study by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the incidence of reported neck and back pain correlate positively to the amount of time spent in sitting positions at work. correlate positively to are correlated positively to correlate positively with correlates positively to correlates positively with

There are two errors with this sentence. First, the singular subject "incidence" does not agree with the plural verb "correlate." Second, the proper idiom is "correlate ... with" rather than "correlate ... to." (A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. (B) The proper idiom is "correlated with" rather than "correlated to." (C) The singular subject "incidence" does not agree with the plural verb "correlate." (D) The proper idiom is "correlate ... with" rather than "correlate ... to." (E) CORRECT. This choice corrects both errors in the original sentence. The singular "incidence" agrees with the singular "correlates," and the proper idiom, "correlate ...with" is employed.

Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus - the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive 1918 flu pandemic - was why researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, especially children and the elderly. Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus - the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive 1918 flu pandemic - was why researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, especially children and the elderly Caused by the H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza that caused the massive 1918 flu pandemic, researchers were convinced that the 2009 swine flu could potentially kill many millions of people, and in particular children and the elderly The H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918, also caused the 2009 swine flu; therefore, researchers were convinced that it had the potential of killing many millions of people, children and the elderly included Because the 2009 swine flu was caused by the H1N1 virus - the same strain of influenza that caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918 - researchers were convinced that it had the potential to kill many millions of people, particularly children and the elderly Researchers were convinced that the 2009 swine flu - which could potentially cause the killing of millions of people, including children and the elderly - was caused by the H1N1 virus, the same strain of influenza that had caused the massive flu pandemic of 1918

This sentence describes a belief held by researchers at the time of the 2009 swine flu (that the flu had the potential to kill millions of people) and gives the reason why those researchers held that belief (because it was caused by the same kind of virus that caused the 1918 pandemic). The sentence should be correctly structured to show this belief and reasoning. The 1918 flu pandemic is presented as a historical about - there is no suggestion of an impact on the timeframe of the sentence, nor is there an emphasis on the completion of that pandemic - so the past perfect is not necessary; the simple past may be used. Finally, the sentence must be constructed so that it is actually a complete sentence (with modifiers). (A) This sentence attempts to use a subordinate clause ("Because the 2009 swine flu...") as the subject of a verb; such constructions are not allowed. Additionally, "potential of killing" is unidiomatic; in context, the correct idiom is "potential to kill". (B) The initial modifier ("caused by..."), which applies to the following subject, seems to suggest that the researchers themselves were caused by the H1N1 virus, an absurd interpretation. Also, the word "and" before "children and the elderly" should not be there; this use of "and" illogically suggests that children and the elderly are not included among the millions of people mentioned. (C) The portion of the sentence written between the first two commas ("the same strain of influenza caused...") is actually an independent clause (i.e., a complete sentence); the correct modifier form would be "the same strain of influenza that caused...". Therefore, this sentence is a run-on. Additionally, "potential of killing" is unidiomatic; in context, the correct idiom is "potential to kill". Finally, the word "included" produces an unacceptable change of meaning. The original context clearly implies that children and the elderly were thought to be particularly at risk; "included," however, merely implies that they were vulnerable to the disease. In other words, this sentence does not properly communicate the elevated risk posed to these two groups of people. (D) CORRECT. The subordinate clause "Because the 2009 swine flu..." clearly communicates the reasoning behind the researchers' fears; the modifier within that clause is properly set off by dashes. The sentence is correctly structured and written idiomatically. (E) This sentence is illogical: it presents the identity of the virus as the researchers' hypothesis and its potential to kill millions of people as factual, when it should do the reverse. In addition, the wording "cause the killing of" suggests indirect causation. That is, it does not suggest that the flu could directly kill people; rather, it suggests that the flu could cause people to be killed by someone or something else.

Many analysts have predicted that, just as the growth of democracy has generally followed industrial development in other nations, democratic institutions will soon flourish in China. predicted that, just as the growth of democracy has generally followed industrial development in other nations, democratic institutions will soon flourish predicted, just as democracy has generally grown following other nations' industrial development, that democratic institutions will soon flourish predicted, just as the growth of democracy generally following industrial development in other nations, that democratic institutions will soon be flourishing predicted that, just as democracy has generally grown after other nations' industrial development, that democratic institutions will soon be flourishing been predicting that, just as the general growth of democracy following other nations' industrial development, democratic institutions will soon flourish

This sentence draws a comparison between two historical patterns: first, the tendency of democracy to grow after industrial development in various countries, and, second, the corresponding case currently unfolding in China. If the "just as..." construction is used, the sentence must be constructed so as to compare these two ideas. Finally, it is clear from context that the analysts are drawing the whole comparison themselves -- i.e., the analysts are predicting the growth of democracy in China by analogy to the historical pattern -- so the sentence should be written in a way that indicates that the whole comparison has been predicted by the analysts. (A) CORRECT. "predicted that..." prefaces the entire comparison, correctly portraying the entire comparison as the analysts' thought process. The comparison itself is properly written with two clauses, the first of which is subordinated by "just as..." (B) In this version of the sentence, "just as..." illogically connects the first two clauses, rather than the last two. In other words, this wording suggests a comparison between the analysts' act of predicting and the growth of democracy -- an illogical comparison. In addition, in the wording "democracy has generally grown following other nations' industrial development", it is unclear whether democracy has grown in the same countries where industrial development has occurred. (C) In this version of the sentence, "just as..." illogically connects the first two elements, rather than the last two. In other words, this wording suggests a comparison between the analysts' act of predicting and the growth of democracy -- an illogical comparison. In addition, "just as" is incorrectly followed by a noun phrase, with no verb ("the growth of democracy generally following..."). This construction is incorrect; "just as" is a subordinating conjunction, and as such must be followed by a clause, not just a noun. (D) The repetition of "that" makes the structure of this choice ungrammatical. (If the modifier is excluded, then the resulting core sentence says "Many analysts have predicted that that...") In addition, in the wording "democracy has generally grown after other nations' industrial development", it is unclear whether democracy has grown in the same countries where industrial development has occurred. (E) This version contains a fragment. "Just as" is incorrectly followed by a noun phrase, with no verb ("the general growth of democracy following..."). This construction is incorrect; "just as" is a subordinating conjunction, and as such must be followed by a clause, not just a noun. In addition, the wording "following other nations' industrial development" makes it unclear whether democracy has grown in the same countries where industrial development has occurred. The correct answer is A.

Unlike Mozart, whose funeral was sparsely attended being buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven's was attended by more than thirty-thousand mourners and his final resting place lies in a famous Vienna cemetery near the graves of Schubert and Brahms. a) being buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven's was attended by about thirty-thousand mourners and his final resting place lies in a famous Vienna cemetery near the graves of Schubert and Brahms b) being buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven's funeral was attended by about thirty-thousand mourners and his final resting place was near the graves of Schubert and Brahms in a famous Vienna cemetery c) and he was buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven was given a funeral attended by more than thirty-thousand mourners and his final resting place lies near the graves of Schubert and Brahms in a famous Vienna cemetery d) and who was buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven's funeral was attended by more than thirty-thousand mourners and his final resting place lies in a famous Vienna cemetery near the graves of Schubert and Brahms e) and who was buried in an unmarked common grave, Beethoven was given a funeral attended by more than thirty-thousand mourners and lies buried near the graves of Schubert and Brahms in a famous Vienna cemetery

This sentence has four errors. First, the subordinate clause "whose funeral was sparsely attended being buried in an unmarked communal grave" is awkward grammatically and ambiguous in meaning; the clause could be interpreted to mean that the funeral was sparsely attended at the time Mozart was being buried, or it could be interpreted to mean that the funeral was sparsely attended because Mozart was buried in an unmarked grave. Second, it is not clear whether the possessive "Beethoven's" refers to "funeral" or to "grave." Third, the sentence makes an illogical comparison between Mozart and either Beethoven's funeral or Beethoven's grave. Finally, the prepositional phrase "near the graves of Schubert and Brahms" is a misplaced modifier. Since it immediately follows "cemetery," it appears to describe the location of the cemetery rather than that of the grave. (A) This choice is incorrect since it repeats the original sentence. (B) First, the subordinate clause "whose funeral was sparsely attended being buried in an unmarked communal grave" is grammatically awkward and ambiguous in meaning. Second, while the introduction of "funeral" makes the possessive "Beethoven's" unambiguous, the sentence still illogically compares "Mozart" to "Beethoven's funeral." Finally, the past tense is used illogically in the clause "his final resting place was ...." Since this clause discusses Beethoven's final resting place, it describes a state of being that is still true today; hence, the use of the present tense is appropriate to describe where Beethoven's body currently lies. (C) "Mozart" is followed by two clauses, "whose funeral was sparsely attended" and "he was buried in an unmarked communal grave." The second of these clauses is incorrect because: 1) it should be a subordinate clause modifying Mozart, and should therefore start with "who was buried", and 2) it should be parallel to the first clause, and should therefore start with "who was buried", and 3) it should not make the illogical assertion that "Unlike Mozart, he [Mozart] was buried....". (D) This choice makes an illogical comparison between "Mozart" and "Beethoven's funeral." In addition, the prepositional phrase "near the graves of Schubert and Brahms" is a misplaced modifier. Since it immediately follows "cemetery," it appears to describe the location of the cemetery rather than that of the grave. (E) CORRECT. "Mozart" is now modified by two subordinate clauses, "whose funeral was attended...." and "who was buried ....," each properly introduced by the relative pronouns "whose" and "who" respectively. In addition, "Mozart" is now logically compared to "Beethoven." Finally, the phrase "near the graves of ..." unambiguously modifies "lies buried."

Two groups of people are not necessarily directly comparable

Troubled Analogy

Accepted that Suspected that Suspected X of VERBing "X is attributed to Y"

True true true

conclude with

When you are concluding with some remark or something

While studying the genetic makeup of corn, a new class of mutant genes was discovered by Barbara McClintock, a discovery which led to greater understanding of cell differentiation. A) a new class of mutant genes was discovered by Barbara McClintock, a discovery which led b) a new class of mutant genes in corn were discovered by Barbara McClintock, leading c) Barbara McClintock discovered a new class of mutant genes, and it led d) Barbara McClintock discovered a new class of mutant genes, a discovery that led e) Barbara McClintock, who discovered a new class of mutant genes, leading

rather, the problem is that the pronoun in this case is just flat-out incorrect -- neither "new class" or "corn" makes sense if substituted for the pronoun. remember, the sentence has to make LITERAL SENSE if you SUBSTITUTE the antecedent into the location of the pronoun. if you ask yourself, VERY LITERALLY, "exactly what led to this greater understanding?", then you'll find that the answer is neither the new class nor the corn -- both of those are inanimate objects, which by themselves can't contribute to human understanding. the exact thing that led to this greater understanding was the discovery described in the sentence; hence the wording of the correct answer.

require x to y or require that x be Y

require x to y

conclude by

to be finished.. eg..an event concludes by 2008

conclude that x

when reaching to a conclusion

"Examples include the brain growing in mice when (the examples were) placed..."

when we have "when + past participle" (and nothing else in between), then we're talking about some action done by the subject of the main clause touching that "when" modifier. If it doesn't make sense for the subject to have done (or have done to it) whatever the action is, then it's wrong. Answers A and D both have this structure.

The college cut expenses by laying off staff and it stopped work on a new library

wrong: The college cut expenses by laying off staff and stopping work on a new library