Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 15 Sep 2014, 23:31

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 105
Location: san jose , CA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [1] , given: 0

GMAT Tests User
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 31 Aug 2004, 23:51
1
This post received
KUDOS
12
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 184
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 4

GMAT Tests User
Re: Great Lakes [#permalink] New post 29 Dec 2010, 07:52
(D)

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
_________________

Raptor

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2011
Posts: 13
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 3

Re: Great Lakes [#permalink] New post 07 Jun 2011, 11:54
IMO A
Firstly How do we know that the law is still in place or not.
The sentence used the relative word reduced, meaning that something that was happening earlier was lessened.And hence the past perfect makes the thing "that was happening earlier" i.e the dumping of phosphates by the municipalities grammatically correct.

The option D, which uses "are" in place of past perfect used in option A, makes one feel that the agreement in 1972 made a law, that reduced something that happened in the future.(denoted by the simple present are) which by all means is illogical.

Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
Math Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2047
Followers: 128

Kudos [?]: 919 [0], given: 376

GMAT Tests User
Re: Great Lakes [#permalink] New post 07 Jun 2011, 12:32
suyash wrote:
IMO A
Firstly How do we know that the law is still in place or not.
The sentence used the relative word reduced, meaning that something that was happening earlier was lessened.And hence the past perfect makes the thing "that was happening earlier" i.e the dumping of phosphates by the municipalities grammatically correct.

The option D, which uses "are" in place of past perfect used in option A, makes one feel that the agreement in 1972 made a law, that reduced something that happened in the future.(denoted by the simple present are) which by all means is illogical.

Kindly correct me if I am wrong.


Your line of thinking is correct. But, there is a minor glitch.
Had been allowed-> would mean that law/limit on the amount of dumping was not valid at the time this agreement was made.
e.g.
In 1900, there was a limit imposed. In 1950, the limit was waived of. In 1972, the limit was reimposed by reducing the limit that was valid in 1950. This entire scenario is not true.
Past perfect should be used only when we need to mention two related activities that occurred at two different times in the past.

Here, the limit was REDUCED in 1972, when there already was a different limit present. Thus, these two events co-existed in the time frame.

Thus, we know "A" is not conveying the intended meaning, making "D" as the only correct option.
_________________

~fluke

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2011
Posts: 13
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 3

Re: Great Lakes [#permalink] New post 07 Jun 2011, 22:01
Thanks Fluke.But this does not clear my doubt.
Correct me in assuming this scenario:
Till 1972 the municipal authorities in both US and Canada had been dumping some amount(depending on their individual laws of land) into the Great Lakes.But in 1972 the agreement between both countries reduced that amount thereby putting a limit to it.
Hence sayng that
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
makes a lot of sense.
hence, Option A.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 90
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 2

Re: SC 74 OG 12 [#permalink] New post 17 Jun 2011, 10:48
lnarayanan wrote:
Yha.. i hope that i understood the actual problem... But I am not clear about the solution
Shall we reatate
where to use " past perfect + past participle" passive (Had been allowed )
&
Where to use " present + past participle" passive ( are allowed )
for " past perfect + past participle" - two action should be taken place.
One should be completed while other is in starting position.
I hope here it is not the case.

Moreover

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates into the great lakes "(Main sentence ).
“that municipalities had been allowed to dump” - is an essential relative clause
modefier. i think we don't need to use " had been + past participle " in modefier.
Plz suggest whether i am in right track or not...


Almost bingo :-D


Not necessarily starting position..for ex..

When I reached the station, the train had left.

train left before I reached the station..both the actions are in the past but the train left before my action..

Hope this helps!
_________________

Fight till you succeed like a gladiator..or doom your life which can be invincible

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Nov 2010
Posts: 12
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 1

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 28 Jun 2011, 08:39
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

Explanation given:

An agreement that occurred in 1972 is correctly described with the past tense verb reduced. Since the dumping continued after the date of the
agreement, the past perfect verb had been allowed should instead be the present are allowed (if the agreement remained in eff ect when the sentence was written) or the past were allowed (if the agreement was no longer in eff ect when the sentence was written). Since were allowed does not appear in any of the options, we can assume that the correct verb tense is are allowed. Th e phrase amount of phosphates is clear and idiomatically correct, whereas phosphate amount is not idiomatic.

A Had been allowed should be are allowed.
B Th e phosphate amount should be the amount of phosphates; the omission of some form of allow is incorrect since the agreement changed not the amount dumped, but the amount permitted to be dumped.
C Present tense reduces should be the past tense reduced; the phosphate amount should be the amount of phosphates; have been allowed should be are allowed.
D Th e past tense reduced is correctly used in this sentence to describe a past action, and the present tense are allowed is used to describe the present situation.
E Present tense reduces should be the past tense reduced; allowed for dumping is an incorrect idiom; allowed for dumping by municipalities is awkward.
Math Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2047
Followers: 128

Kudos [?]: 919 [0], given: 376

GMAT Tests User
Re: need more clarity on the explanation to a question [#permalink] New post 28 Jun 2011, 09:02
john2roll2 wrote:
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

Explanation given:

An agreement that occurred in 1972 is correctly described with the past tense verb reduced. Since the dumping continued after the date of the
agreement, the past perfect verb had been allowed should instead be the present are allowed (if the agreement remained in eff ect when the sentence was written) or the past were allowed (if the agreement was no longer in eff ect when the sentence was written). Since were allowed does not appear in any of the options, we can assume that the correct verb tense is are allowed. Th e phrase amount of phosphates is clear and idiomatically correct, whereas phosphate amount is not idiomatic.

A Had been allowed should be are allowed.
B Th e phosphate amount should be the amount of phosphates; the omission of some form of allow is incorrect since the agreement changed not the amount dumped, but the amount permitted to be dumped.
C Present tense reduces should be the past tense reduced; the phosphate amount should be the amount of phosphates; have been allowed should be are allowed.
D Th e past tense reduced is correctly used in this sentence to describe a past action, and the present tense are allowed is used to describe the present situation.
E Present tense reduces should be the past tense reduced; allowed for dumping is an incorrect idiom; allowed for dumping by municipalities is awkward.


This is discussed innumerable times in the past.

Here's one of the discussions:
sc-1000-oa-not-sure-102695.html
_________________

~fluke

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 244
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 25

Reviews Badge
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2011, 00:54
B and C are wrong- phosphates amount is wrong.... noun adjective should not be used with measurement or qualtity woards.....

A and E are wrong- meaning issue- A nd E indicates that the agreement is no longer exist...

D is right
_________________

-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Essaying
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 156
Location: Ghana
Concentration: Finance, Finance
Schools: Cambridge
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
GPA: 3.9
WE: Accounting (Education)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 8

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2011, 05:57
Between A and D.
I settled for D because had been reports an action that occurred earlier in time before another. This happened after the agreement.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2011
Posts: 188
Concentration: General Management, Technology
Schools: Sloan '16 (D)
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.76
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 19

GMAT Tests User
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2011, 07:03
Interesting question. I was torn between A and D.

D because the amount of phosphates that was reduced was the pre-agreement amount. So I picked "had been". They were allowed to dump that amount but not anymore. Can anyone clarify why this is wrong?
1 KUDOS received
Current Student
avatar
Status: MLT Fellowship - MBA Prep
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma - Business Honors Society, FINRA Securities Licenses, CA Insurance Licenses
Joined: 29 Nov 2010
Posts: 174
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V38
GMAT 2: 750 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.47
WE: Sales (Retail Banking)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 28 [1] , given: 8

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 03 Nov 2011, 20:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
D. great question though! tricky if you over look the "are allowed" part
_________________

Brandon Hoffman
http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdhoffman

Management Leadership of Tomorrow (MLT) - MBA Programs Fellow
MLT LA Chapter - Board Member / Recruiting Officer
Net Impact - Professional Chapter Co-President
MBADiversity Organization - Global Fellow, CHINA

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 155
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 3

GMAT Tests User
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 09 Dec 2011, 17:02
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 818
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
Schools: Ross '17, Duke '16
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 43

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Brutal SC [#permalink] New post 09 Dec 2011, 20:39
Correct choice is D. I also see this question on OG12.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you :)

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 276
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 110

Re: Brutal SC [#permalink] New post 09 Dec 2011, 22:40
This one is simple. D is the answer. As already mentioned above, this question is a part of OG12 too.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 261
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 20

Re: OG Question- Agreement between USA and Canada. [#permalink] New post 31 Dec 2011, 09:43
understudy wrote:
This one seems really screwed up. I just took my first GMAT Prep and scored a V45 with 100% accuracy in SC and can't figure out why A is not a perfectly good answer.

Logically, the 1972 agreement reduces the amount of phosphate dumping that was allowed prior to the agreement, hence the HAD BEEN ALLOWED. Prior to the agreement, munis were allowed to dump X (had been allowed to dump X) and after the agreement, they've since been allowed to dump Y.

The 1972 agreement didn't reduce the amount of phosphate dumping currently allowed (as OA choice A implies)... it reduced the amount of phosphate dumping allowed before the agreement. I can't see how "are allowed" can be rationalized.


Here, what we need to understand is - the agreement DID NOT COMPLETELY STOP the dumping. It just reduced the amount. Had it completely stopped, we can think of the dumping as the first event and can use past perfect.

And I don't agree with the option F as well. Because, there is no clue that there was some other event(or agreement) that changed the dumping quantity again, whatever 1972 agreement tried to achieve is still true today and hence 'are allowed' is correct.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Director
Director
User avatar
Status: Enjoying the GMAT journey....
Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 735
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V24
Followers: 60

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 264

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: OG Question- Agreement between USA and Canada. [#permalink] New post 02 Jan 2012, 06:02
had F been there, i would have fell for it...otherwise D
_________________

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.

A WAY TO INCREASE FROM QUANT 35-40 TO 47 : a-way-to-increase-from-q35-40-to-q-138750.html

Q 47/48 To Q 50 + the-final-climb-quest-for-q-50-from-q47-129441.html#p1064367

Three good RC strategies three-different-strategies-for-attacking-rc-127287.html

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 348
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 12

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2012, 23:08
2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I am a bit confused by this question.I saw this a couple of times and the answered is different in both places.The 1st answer says that had been should be used because it is past continous and the 2nd answer says that are should be used as the act of dumping is still taking place si it should be in simple present.

I favour the 2nd reasoning, any thoughts?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 370
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 102 [0], given: 31

Re: simple present Vs past continuous [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2012, 00:25
vdadwal wrote:
2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I am a bit confused by this question.I saw this a couple of times and the answered is different in both places.The 1st answer says that had been should be used because it is past continous and the 2nd answer says that are should be used as the act of dumping is still taking place si it should be in simple present.

I favour the 2nd reasoning, any thoughts?


I think D should be correct.
My comments:
C/D out -->wrong tense
Also the agreement cant reduce the amount already dumped A/B out

Hence D
_________________

Practice Practice and practice...!!

If my reply /analysis is helpful-->please press KUDOS
If there's a loophole in my analysis--> suggest measures to make it airtight.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 275
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 20

Reviews Badge
Re: simple present Vs past continuous [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2012, 04:53
vdadwal wrote:
2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I am a bit confused by this question.I saw this a couple of times and the answered is different in both places.The 1st answer says that had been should be used because it is past continous and the 2nd answer says that are should be used as the act of dumping is still taking place si it should be in simple present.

I favour the 2nd reasoning, any thoughts?


You cannot reduce the amount dumped earlier...
D is correct and it is from OG, please change the answer
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 12
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Organizational Behavior
GMAT 1: 640 Q42 V36
GPA: 3.79
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 1

Re: simple present Vs past continuous [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2012, 07:32
vikram4689 wrote:
vdadwal wrote:
2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I am a bit confused by this question.I saw this a couple of times and the answered is different in both places.The 1st answer says that had been should be used because it is past continous and the 2nd answer says that are should be used as the act of dumping is still taking place si it should be in simple present.

I favour the 2nd reasoning, any thoughts?


You cannot reduce the amount dumped earlier...
D is correct and it is from OG, please change the answer



You looked up this question in the OG and found that it was actually D? Out of curiosity, which guide is this from?
Re: simple present Vs past continuous   [#permalink] 17 Apr 2012, 07:32
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States kabilank87 0 18 Mar 2013, 23:05
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States jamesrwrightiii 0 25 Oct 2007, 14:38
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States joemama142000 0 20 Feb 2006, 12:11
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States ywilfred 0 30 Aug 2005, 05:57
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States dipaksingh 0 04 Jun 2005, 12:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1  ...  9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20    Next  [ 397 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.