 |
| Author |
Message |
|
Jason.tuyj
|
Post subject: Ron Pls come and explain me, it's tough Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:08 am |
|
 |
| Forum Guests |
|
|
Posts: 36
|
|
Unlike human runners, who broke the four-minute mile in 1954 and they consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have had winning times with little improvement: Secretariat’s world-record-breaking Derby tine of 1:59 2/5, for example, was set in 1973 and remained unsurpassed more than a quarter of a century later.
a) they consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have had winning times with little improvement b) they have consistently recorded faster times ever since, those of horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times c) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times d) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, in those of classic races such as the Kentucky Derby, horses have had winning times with little improvement e) consistently recorded faster times ever since, those of horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times
OA is C, but lots of people pick D, however I pick E.
Pls explain in detail why pick C!!!
The source of this SC is from GWD, (GWD you can search on GOOGLE and find what it is, but from I Know it is Chinese copied GMAT stipulated test originating all the questions from previous GMAT actual tests.)
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
saptadeepc
|
Post subject: Re: Ron Pls come and explain me, it's tough Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:43 am |
|
 |
| Students |
|
|
Posts: 55
|
Jason.tuyj wrote: Unlike human runners, who broke the four-minute mile in 1954 and they consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have had winning times with little improvement: Secretariat’s world-record-breaking Derby tine of 1:59 2/5, for example, was set in 1973 and remained unsurpassed more than a quarter of a century later.
a) they consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have had winning times with little improvement b) they have consistently recorded faster times ever since, those of horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times c) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times d) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, in those of classic races such as the Kentucky Derby, horses have had winning times with little improvement e) consistently recorded faster times ever since, those of horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times
OA is C, but lots of people pick D, however I pick E.
Pls explain in detail why pick C!!!
The source of this SC is from GWD, (GWD you can search on GOOGLE and find what it is, but from I Know it is Chinese copied GMAT stipulated test originating all the questions from previous GMAT actual tests.) Firstly - We need to compare human runners ( humans ) to horses here ( :D ) and not compare "human" to "those of horses" Secondly, Since "like" is not underlined, we need to use NOUN on either side. those in horses -- is prepositional phrase and cannot be used to compare with "like"
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: Ron Pls come and explain me, it's tough Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 7:20 am |
|
 |
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
Quote: d) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, in those of classic races such as the Kentucky Derby, horses have had winning times with little improvement " those of classic races" --> "those" is incorrect; there is no noun for which this pronoun can stand. also, "unlike human runners" requires a direct comparison with the horses themselves. this comparison starts with "in...", so it's wrong. “had winning times with little improvement” is unclear. this wording makes it seem as though the horses have been able to win the race, even though they (the horses) have not improved very much. Quote: e) consistently recorded faster times ever since, those of horses in classic races such as the Kentucky Derby have shown little improvement in winning times " those of classic races" --> "those" is incorrect; there is no noun for which this pronoun can stand. also, "unlike human runners" requires a direct comparison with the horses themselves. this comparison starts with "those of...", so it's wrong. a verb that is modified by "since" must be in the present perfect.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
abemartin87
|
Post subject: Re: Ron Pls come and explain me, it's tough Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:34 pm |
|
 |
| Prospective Students |
|
|
Posts: 36
|
|
Hey Ron,
For a moment, could we just ignore the error that "those" does not have a proper antecedent and that "Unlike" requires a comparable noun.In answer choice (D)
d) have consistently recorded faster times ever since, in those of classic races such as the Kentucky Derby, horses have had winning times with little improvement
Would it be safe to adopt this rule:
" COMMA + Preposition" is always a modifier that ALWAYS modifies the preceding noun? Regardless of the type of modifier " COMMA + Preposition" is.
X, on the box X, in the box X, around the box etc... All modify X
Could we also say that "in those" in option (D) is illogically modifying "ever since"?
Thank you in advance Ron!! Your my hero dude!
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
tim
|
Post subject: Re: Ron Pls come and explain me, it's tough Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:54 pm |
|
 |
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 2242 Location: Southwest Airlines, seat 21C
|
|
Yes, “in those” is a problem in D. I would caution you though not to adopt a blanket rule about comma-preposition modifying the previous noun, well, mainly because it just isn’t true. Consider: Statistics have shown that, in the decade following World War II, many families had one or more children. An absurd example I know (although true).. :)
_________________ Tim Sanders Manhattan GMAT Instructor
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
|
 |