Register    Login    Search    Rss Feeds

 Page 1 of 1 [ 12 posts ] 



 
Author Message
 Post subject: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:09 pm 
Many environmentalists, and some economists, say that free trade encourages industry to relocate to countries with ineffective or poorly enforced antipollution laws, mostly in the developing world, and that, in order to maintain competitiveness, rich nations have joined this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution.

A. that, in order to maintain competitiveness, rich nations have joined this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution

B. that, for maintaining competitiveness, rich nations join in this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution

C. that rich nations join this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution because of wanting to maintain competitiveness

D. that in rich nations, joining this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution is a result of wanting to maintain competition

E. that wanting to maintain competition is making rich nations join in this downward slide toward an attitude about pollution that is more lax

What is wrong in B and why A is correct > I presume B is correct "free trade encourages" and "rich nations join" are parallel
This GMAT prep question


Top 
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:01 pm 
A is Correct because of proper Tense Sequence.


B is supperficial Parallelisim one ---Say can be Parallel to encourage Join.

Whereas in A the Sequence of events is correctly laid out ---The Laws Encourages and to Maintain competition the countries HAVE joined.


Top 
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:06 pm 
Saurabh Malpani wrote:
A is Correct because of proper Tense Sequence.


B is supperficial Parallelisim one ---Say can be Parallel to encourage Join.

Whereas in A the Sequence of events is correctly laid out ---The Laws Encourages and to Maintain competition the countries HAVE joined.



Just to add I think ARE JOINING is better than Join in the context Presented.

MGMAT Tutors please comment.


Top 
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:23 am 
Offline
ManhattanGMAT Staff


Posts: 7146
here are a couple of problems with choice b:
- 'for maintaining competitiveness' is bad idiomatic usage: it's an incorrect way to express intent or purpose. (the construction in choice a is surprisingly wordy - in order to could be replaced with just to, with no loss of meaning - and might not make it onto the real exam.)
- 'rich nations join in this downward slide': fatal change in meaning. this wording implies that the rich nations are colluding with each other, metaphorically holding hands, deciding together to become more lax about pollution. (choice a expresses the correct meaning, which is that the slide is happening and that rich nations are individually joining it.)
- the simple present tense join implies that there is some sort of timeless truth about the statement being made. that's the wrong meaning: the sentence is meant to say that the rich nations have begun to do this as a result of current trends. if you don't understand the difference, consider the following analogous examples:
private universities have admitted more females than males --> meaning: this is an ongoing or cumulative trend, continuing into the present from some designated starting point
private universities admit more females than males --> meaning: this is a fundamental truth about the way private universities operate


Top 
 Post subject:
 Post Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:27 am 
Offline
ManhattanGMAT Staff


Posts: 7146
Saurabh Malpani wrote:
Just to add I think ARE JOINING is better than Join in the context Presented.

MGMAT Tutors please comment.


are joining would make sense, but it would also fundamentally alter the meaning of the original.
have joined (the original) means that the joining has already happened (although its effects continue and are relevant to the present-day situation). are joining, on the other hand, would imply that rich nations are just starting to join up.

remember that you generally shouldn't change the meaning of the original sentence at all, unless the original is total nonsense.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 4:38 am 
Offline
Students


Posts: 14
I have two questions about choice C and D.

C. that rich nations join this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution because of wanting to maintain competitiveness

Is choice C wrong because of the following reasons?
(1) wrong tense: present perfect tense should be used instead of present simple tense
(2) the usage of "because of V-ing" is unidiomatic

In choice D:
D. that in rich nations, joining this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution is a result of wanting to maintain competition

Could you please explain to me why (D) is wrong?

Thanks in advance!


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 6:21 am 
Offline
Students


Posts: 1
Just one more question here... can you please help me understand the usage of say that . I was under the assumption say that is not preferred in GMAT.

TIA


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 8:26 am 
Offline
ManhattanGMAT Staff


Posts: 7146
trang.kieu.phung wrote:
I have two questions about choice C and D.

C. that rich nations join this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution because of wanting to maintain competitiveness

Is choice C wrong because of the following reasons?
(1) wrong tense: present perfect tense should be used instead of present simple tense
(2) the usage of "because of V-ing" is unidiomatic


correct.

Quote:
In choice D:
D. that in rich nations, joining this downward slide toward more lax attitudes about pollution is a result of wanting to maintain competition

Could you please explain to me why (D) is wrong?

Thanks in advance!


the way in which that choice is divided is strange -- it suggests that we are talking about some phenomenon that happens *in* rich nations, rather than talking about the actual actions of rich nations.
i.e., the writing of this sentence suggests that, *in* rich nations, *someone* is joining the downward slide -- but we don't know who.

also, "is a result of VERBing" --> i'm not sure whether this is an actual idiom error, but, by comparison to the wording in choice (a), it's clearly inferior.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2012 3:44 am 
Offline
Forum Guests


Posts: 4
Hi, Ron, I find another problem in this sentence:
The meaning of words: competivitness vs. competition.
Actualy, the original meaning is to maintain "competivitness", but not "competition."

Am I right?


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:26 am 
Offline
ManhattanGMAT Staff


Posts: 7146
gtonggtong wrote:
Hi, Ron, I find another problem in this sentence:
The meaning of words: competivitness vs. competition.
Actualy, the original meaning is to maintain "competivitness", but not "competition."

Am I right?


yes, you are right.

“maintaining competitiveness” means that the nations in question want to remain competitive -- a meaning that makes sense in context.
“maintaining competition” would mean that they wanted to keep up the actual competition between nations -- in other words, to keep nations competing with each other. that doesn't really make much sense; the original wording is more appropriate.


Top 
 Post subject: Re:
 Post Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 12:10 pm 
Offline
Forum Guests


Posts: 206
RonPurewal wrote:
here are a couple of problems with choice b:
- 'for maintaining competitiveness' is bad idiomatic usage: it's an incorrect way to express intent or purpose. (the construction in choice a is surprisingly wordy - in order to could be replaced with just to, with no loss of meaning - and might not make it onto the real exam.)
- 'rich nations join in this downward slide': fatal change in meaning. this wording implies that the rich nations are colluding with each other, metaphorically holding hands, deciding together to become more lax about pollution. (choice a expresses the correct meaning, which is that the slide is happening and that rich nations are individually joining it.)
- the simple present tense join implies that there is some sort of timeless truth about the statement being made. that's the wrong meaning: the sentence is meant to say that the rich nations have begun to do this as a result of current trends. if you don't understand the difference, consider the following analogous examples:
private universities have admitted more females than males --> meaning: this is an ongoing or cumulative trend, continuing into the present from some designated starting point
private universities admit more females than males --> meaning: this is a fundamental truth about the way private universities operate


Ron, in A, "have joined" dose not parallel with "encourages" .Pls, help.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Many environmentalists, and some economists
 Post Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 7:20 pm 
Offline
ManhattanGMAT Staff


Posts: 2242
Location: Southwest Airlines, seat 21C
of course they aren't parallel. why should they be?

_________________
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor


Top 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
 Page 1 of 1 [ 12 posts ] 





Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: