 |
| Author |
Message |
|
cesar.rodriguez.blanco
|
Post subject: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in  Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
 |
| Course Students |
|
|
Posts: 145
|
|
I do not know how to solve this SC.
A and D are out because THEY has no antecedent.
E, I suppose that is wrong, but I do not know exactly why.
What are the differences between B and C?
A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in December 2000 mandates that any new drug that they intend to be used both by adults and children must undergo pediatric study and that its manufactures list children’s doses on the label.
A. drug that they intend to be used both by adults and children must
B. drug whose intended use is for adults and children as well
C. drug intended for use by both adults and children
D. drug, if they intend that it be used by adults and also children, must
E. drug, if intended for use both by adults and children, must
|
|
  |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:38 pm |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
cesar.rodriguez.blanco wrote: I do not know how to solve this SC.
A and D are out because THEY has no antecedent.
E, I suppose that is wrong, but I do not know exactly why.
What are the differences between B and C?
A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in December 2000 mandates that any new drug that they intend to be used both by adults and children must undergo pediatric study and that its manufactures list children’s doses on the label.
A. drug that they intend to be used both by adults and children must
B. drug whose intended use is for adults and children as well
C. drug intended for use by both adults and children
D. drug, if they intend that it be used by adults and also children, must
E. drug, if intended for use both by adults and children, must the only reason to kick out (e) is pretty hard to see. namely, if you ignore modifiers, you'll note that the underlying structure of that answer choice is the rule ... mandates that any new drug ... must undergo...that's incorrect because it's redundant. if you say "mandate", you just use the command subjunctive; you can't include ANOTHER word implying necessity or compulsion, such as "must". (b) is really ugly. "as well" serves no purpose whatsoever. "...whose intended use is for..." is noticeably inferior for "...intended for use by...". again, this isn't the sort of thing you'd be expected to figure out by yourself, but, when the contrast is present in answer choices, you are reasonably expected to pick out which of the two is superior. also, "for" is simply incorrect in this context. the drugs are meant to be used BY, not "for", people.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tankobe
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:36 am |
|
|
| Prospective Students |
|
|
Posts: 132
|
RonPurewal wrote: "as well" serves no purpose whatsoever.
Dear Ron(or stracey), i am always confused with and, and ...too, and also, and and ...as well. are the last three gramatical idiom? Are they ,i mean, kind of reduntant? yeah, i have seen and also frequently in OG material, but i am not sure of and ...too and and ...as well. would you please share you opinion about the difference of these phrase? here is a question and its explanation(delected) from OG10, i wish it will do you a favor.(oh,god! today, i know we are forbidden to put the OG problems in the forum; i think the best way is to change part of the problems——if it dose not work, every staff can delect the post) In .. year, only 20 percent of the female ... planned to major in education, while 40 percent chose business, making business the most popular major for female as well as for male.1) as well as for male || 2)as well as male || 3)and male too 4)and male as well || 5)and also male OA is 1) stephen!
Last edited by tankobe on Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:41 am, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
danielnorton25
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:15 pm |
|
Posts: 3
|
tankobe wrote: RonPurewal wrote: "as well" serves no purpose whatsoever.
Dear Ron(or stracey), i am always confused with and, and ...too, and also, and and ...as well. are the last three gramatical idiom? Are they ,i mean, kind of reduntant? yeah, i have seen and also frequently in OG material, but i am not sure of and ...too and and ...as well. would you please share you opinion about the difference of these phrase? here is a question and its explanation(delected) from OG10, i wish it will do you a favor.(oh,god! today, i know we are forbidden to put the OG problems in the forum; i think the best way is to change part of the problems——if it dose not work, every staff can delect the post) In .. year, only X percent of the Somebody1 ... planned to major in education, while Y percent chose business, making business the most popular major for Somebody1 as well as for Somebody2.1) as well as for Somebody2 || 2)as well as Somebody2 || 3)and Somebody2 too 4)and Somebody2 as well || 5)and also Somebody2 OA is 1) stephen! Stephen, Can you do all of us a favor and post your unrelated question in a new thread? Thanks. Btw, I believe her name is Stacey.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
enniguy
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:28 am |
|
|
| Students |
|
|
Posts: 16
|
|
The moment I read the question, I noticed the absence of a subject for this clause "they intend" (They who?). Since I could not find a subject elsewhere in the "original" sentence, I started looking for an option with passive voice (Specifically a past participle for the verb "intend"). That left C and E.
E sounded "lengthy" (and I did not notice the redundancy pointed out by Ron). So I chose C. I hope this is a reasonable method to tackle this question.
By the way, am I right in assuming that "intended" is an adjective in B ? So, will "intended use" be the adjective phrase describing "drug"?
Thanks for any help that you offer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:40 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
|
actually, there's a much easier way to kick out (e): poor parallelism.
(e) has
both by adults and children
not ok (one has "by"; the other is just a noun)
(c) has
(by) both adults and children
this is good - the parallel structures are both nouns; "by" is not included in either one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RonPurewal
|
Post subject: Re: SC: A Food and Drug Administration rule implemented in Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:42 am |
|
|
| ManhattanGMAT Staff |
|
|
Posts: 7146
|
enniguy wrote: By the way, am I right in assuming that "intended" is an adjective in B ? So, will "intended use" be the adjective phrase describing "drug"? "intended" is indeed an adjective, but it modifies "use". that's a standalone adj+noun construction. i.e., "intended use" is basically a NOUN, so it doesn't "describe" or "modify" anything. a drug whose intended use is...--> basically the same as a boy whose sister is...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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
|
|
|
|
