![]() |
| The Environmental Protection Agency frequently puts |
|
Hei
Guest
|
bump..
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
| HMM |
|
enginpasa1
Guest
|
STUMPED.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
jana
Guest
|
I guess I got it....
CHANCE OF..is corerct idion not the CHANCE TO.. I checked in Dictionary...there are no examples of CHANCE TO... |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Hei
Guest
|
It depends on which dictionary you used.
Also dictionaries usually don't include all usages unfortunately =( sigh.. I use Longman, and there is an example of "chance to": Ralph was waiting for a chance to introduce himself. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Ron Purewal
MGMAT STAFF
|
whoa, you guys are missing the main point here: the word whose idiomatic usage is being tested is risk, not chance.
this is a bit hard to see in this particular sentence, so here's an analogy (which i'm making up on the spot - not part of an official question): as small a collection as three pirated albums has occasionally drawn the attention of the recording industry. in this case, 'collection', not 'albums', is the subject of 'has drawn' (which can be inferred from the fact that 'has' is singular). this is the case because this sentence is equivalent to the following rearranged version: a collection as small as three pirated albums has occasionally drawn the attention of the recording industry. -- the same reasoning applies here; you're looking for idiomatic usage that agrees with 'risk', not 'chance'. -- the last poster is correct in one sense, which is that there are correct idiomatic usages of 'chance to'. HOWEVER, the last poster is incorrect in this particular scenario, because 'chance to' is NOT used when 'chance' refers to a mathematical probability (as it does in this context). in the case of mathematical probabilities, you can only use 'chance of'. for instance, you can't say this treatment has a 70% chance to cure the disease; you have to say chance of curing. hth! |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Hei
Guest
|
Thanks Ron.
Referring back to one of my original question, what's the difference between "risk of doing something" and "risk to do something"? I found that Longman dictionary includes both usages. Thanks in advance. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Vasu
Guest
|
For people who are still wondering as to what the answer is, its B
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Ron Purewal
MGMAT STAFF
|
i'm not aware of 'risk to do something'. you could probably cobble together a sentence that looked something like this: james thought that it was an unacceptable risk to ride his bike in traffic. ...but that sentence is bulky and awkward, and would be better rephrased as something like james thought that riding his bike in traffic was unacceptably risky. the only widely seen legitimate use of 'risk of' of which i'm aware is the following: riding in traffic poses considerable risk to bicyclists. ...but this usage doesn't square with what you've posted, because, here, 'to' is used as a preposition (to PERSON or ENTITY), not to introduce an infinitive. you say that 'risk to do something' is in your dictionary. is there a sample sentence showing that usage? if so, could you post the sample sentence? |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Hei
Guest
|
hi Ron,
here is the example from Longman Dictionary: It was a calculated risk to appoint a man without management experience to such a senior post. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Ron Purewal
MGMAT STAFF
|
ah yeah, that's a different structure entirely. those sorts of things, beginning with 'it is/was/would be/etc.', are actually inverted constructions: in other words, 'it would be X for Y to do Z' is the same as 'for Y to do Z would be X' 'it would be X to do Z' is the same as 'to do Z would be X' ...so the longman example is really a convoluted way of saying to appoint a man without management experience to such a senior post was a calculated risk. it's uncommon, although not truly rare, to see infinitives used in this sort of way. (note that the sentence i just wrote - completely unintentionally - can be rearranged in exactly the same sort of way. see if you can do it) -- as an analogy, you can perfectly well say: it would be a mistake to marry her ...which is really an inverted-construction way of saying 'to marry her would be a mistake'. but a sentence can't refer to 'the mistake to marry her'; the proper idiom in that case would be 'the mistake of marrying her'. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Hei
Guest
|
Thanks Ron!
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Rey Fernandez
MGMAT STAFF
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
| i still don't get it... |
|
steph
Guest
|
sorry ron :-( i am little slow and don't understand how your example is applicable to "risk". could you please try to explain again? i got the right answer only by knowing the idiomatic usage of "chance of".. thank you very much in advance! |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Liz
Guest
|
Ron/Someone:
Could you please explain why D is wrong in this case? Is D wrong because: - the "a risk as little" is off? OR - "risk... for causing" is off? Thanks! |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
| The Environmental Protection Agency frequently puts |
|
||
|
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Content © Manhattan GMAT Forums
*GMAT and GMAT CAT are registered trademarks of the Graduate Management Admission Council,
which neither sponsors nor endorses this test preparation service.
Content © Manhattan GMAT Forums
*GMAT and GMAT CAT are registered trademarks of the Graduate Management Admission Council,
which neither sponsors nor endorses this test preparation service.

