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

It is currently 24 Oct 2014, 13:29

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 [?]: 16 [1] , given: 0

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 31 Aug 2004, 23:51
1
This post received
KUDOS
13
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
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1299

Kudos [?]: 3677 [0], given: 185

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 12 Dec 2012, 16:06
Expert's post
Hi tinyturtle,

Per the context of the sentence, we know that the municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount of phosphate in the Great Lakes. This was a fixed amount, say 200 pounds per month. This is a specific amount. Hence, use of singular “amount” is absolutely correct here.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Posts: 23
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 17

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 13 Dec 2012, 00:22
I also did not understand the usage of the amount of since it is phosphateS
Current Student
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1097
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 274 [0], given: 67

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 13 Dec 2012, 08:01
egmat wrote:
Hi All

the verb tense - past perfect tense - had been allowed - is incorrect because it non-sensically implies that municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount sometime in the past - (they are no longer allowed to dump now, since the action is already completed) and then the next event in the past happened - the agreement reduced this amount. It is not possible to reduce an amount for something that has already happened (had been allowed).


Hi shradha
I am confused when you say both A and B has the same tense error i.e. the job is no more done...

I advised him because I had done the job in the past.<<<It means i am not doing that job>>>
I advised him because I had been doing it.<<<It means i am doing the job>>> or <<<I am no more doing the job>>>

Also what is the difference between "reduced the amount of phosphate" and "reduced the phosphate amount.."

Can we blindly infer that with which ever action "had" is used that will mean that action itself is over.......

Thanks
Archit
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 13 Dec 2012, 23:10
Hi Shraddha,

I got 2 sentences from http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... -vs-fewer/

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

I learned a rule that "Amount" is used for un-countable noun. I donn't understand the first sentence. Could you help explain?

Thanks,
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1299

Kudos [?]: 3677 [0], given: 185

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 14 Dec 2012, 06:05
Expert's post
tinyturtle wrote:

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

I learned a rule that "Amount" is used for un-countable noun. I donn't understand the first sentence. Could you help explain?

Thanks,


Hi tinyturtle,

Yes, we do use "amount" for uncountable noun. And this rule is in play the first sentence.

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

Mashed potatoes can not be counted because they are crushed and mashed after being boiled. Hence, it is not possible to count them.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

However, when a potato is baked, it still remains in its shape and can be counted. Hence, this sentence is correct.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 16 Dec 2012, 04:26
Thank you so much Shraddha. I got it now. :)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 78
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 30 Dec 2012, 09:03
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 78
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 30 Dec 2012, 09:04
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 78
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 30 Dec 2012, 09:05
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Expert Post
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 2444
Followers: 312

Kudos [?]: 2622 [0], given: 697

Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2013, 12:49
Expert's post
Hi

first of all the part of the sentence must be always underlined. Thanks

Secondly: 1000 series is not a good resource to study at all.

B is wron because the right verbe tense is had been allowed to dump not dumping

D is wrong because it seems to suggest that the permission to municipalities is given by itself and not by an agreement. The verb must point out to the real subject of the sentece: the agreement NOT municipalities

regards
_________________

COLLECTION OF QUESTIONS
Quant: 1. Bunuel Signature Collection - The Next Generation 2. Bunuel Signature Collection ALL-IN-ONE WITH SOLUTIONS 3. Veritas Prep Blog PDF Version
Verbal:1. Best EXTERNAL resources to tackle the GMAT Verbal Section 2. e-GMAT's ALL CR topics-Consolidated 3. New Critical Reasoning question bank by carcass 4. Meaning/Clarity SC Question Bank by Carcass_Souvik 5. e-GMAT's ALL SC topics-Consolidated-2nd Edition 6. The best reading to improve Reading Comprehension 7.Verbal question bank and Directories

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 136
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 3

Premium Member
Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2013, 17:28
i strongly feel that D sud be the answer . in fact A is wrong !!
A gives a nonsensical meaning that the agreement of 1972 reduced some thing that these countries had dumped in the past !! u can reduce the amount of something that these countries are dumping at the moment and not of something that they had dumped

Quote:
carcass wrote:D is wrong because it seems to suggest that the permission to municipalities is given by itself and not by an agreement. The verb must point out to the real subject of the sentece: the agreement NOT municipalities


no where it is suggesting such a meaning !! in fact all that D means is that some agreement reduced the amount of some blah blah thing that these municipalities are allowed to dump
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Tougher times ...
Joined: 04 Nov 2012
Posts: 53
Location: India
GMAT 1: 480 Q32 V25
WE: General Management (Manufacturing)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 44

Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 17 Mar 2013, 05:38
kabilank87 wrote:
neha24 wrote:
i strongly feel that D sud be the answer . in fact A is wrong !!
A gives a nonsensical meaning that the agreement of 1972 reduced some thing that these countries had dumped in the past !! u can reduce the amount of something that these countries are dumping at the moment and not of something that they had dumped

Quote:
carcass wrote:D is wrong because it seems to suggest that the permission to municipalities is given by itself and not by an agreement. The verb must point out to the real subject of the sentece: the agreement NOT municipalities


no where it is suggesting such a meaning !! in fact all that D means is that some agreement reduced the amount of some blah blah thing that these municipalities are allowed to dump


In "D" can we use the present tense " are " ? Since the entire argument is in past, why can't we use "were" , instead of "are".


in your explanation of "A", since there are 2 actions happened in the past ( the agreement reduced ... and the countries dumped ), and the action dumped occurs earlier , what's wrong in using " past perfect - had dumped " ? - It is according to the definition of usage of past perfect in manhattan SC.

Similarly in "B" .. the background event is " countries dumping " and the interrupting foreground event is " the agreement reducing what the countries dumping " .. i feel this is also correct according to the usage of past progressive in manhattan SC.

Will you please clarify ..?
_________________

Kabilan.K
Kudos is a boost to participate actively and contribute more to the forum :)

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.04
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

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

Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 17 Mar 2013, 07:59
kabilank87 wrote:
1. 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

The correct answer is A. Why not B or D ?


IMO, D is the answer.
A used past perfect "had been". This is not needed as no 2 past events are chronologically arranged. Likewise, the usage of past perfect continuous is also not needed in option B.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.04
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

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

Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 18 Mar 2013, 19:04
kabilank87 wrote:
anandrajakrishnan wrote:
kabilank87 wrote:
1. 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

The correct answer is A. Why not B or D ?


IMO, D is the answer.
A used past perfect "had been". This is not needed as no 2 past events are chronologically arranged. Likewise, the usage of past perfect continuous is also not needed in option B.


Hi anandrajakrishnan / Neha

In " A " i see the 2 events are chronologically arranged .

By assuming we are in 1972 when the agreement have just passed, we would have told that " The countries have been dumping it for some years blah blanh blah .. and the agreement reduced that( Dumping). The " dumping" started in the past and continues till the agreement came into effect and reduced it. Since it involves 2 different time complex time periods. So i think past perfect / perfect continuous should be used here. But i am not certain about it.


There is a subtle difference in meaning here. Option A changes the meaning to "the agreement reduced the amount of phosphates that munipality has dumped so far". How can the agreement reduce the amount of already dumped phosphate?
Option D gives the meaning outright that "the amount of phosphates that the municipalities were allowed to dump is reduced after the agreement"
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Posts: 75
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 3

Re: Verb tense & participles [#permalink] New post 18 Mar 2013, 23:05
kabilank87 wrote:
1. 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

The correct answer is A. Why not B or D ?



anandrajakrishnan,

You are right - How can the agreement reduce the amount of already dumped phosphate?
But the agreement can put a restriction on the amount of phosphate to be dumped.

Moreover, D changes the tense flow of the sentence by the usage of 'are'.
Hope this clarifies.

Regds
Sony
_________________

A bend in the road is not the end of the road unless you fail to take a turn.....

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 453
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 70

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States [#permalink] New post 07 May 2013, 23:26
All duplicate threads on this topic have been merged.

Please read and follow the Guidelines for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum before posting anything.
Expert Post
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Preparing for the another shot...!
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1425
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 129

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 62

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 06:15
Expert's post
rahul 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


Replying to a PM:
I feel the answer is A. It would be good if I get the correct explanation for D to be the answer.
Moreover, I would like to negate some points made about the choice A. In A, actually the agreement is not making any change in the amount already dumped but rather in the amount that was allowed.

Here "had" is acting as double past such that it distinguishes two events. Initially municipal communities were allowed to dump some amount, but as a result of 1972 agreement, that amount has been altered. Please make a note that these events are in past tense.

PS: I have been out of study mode for a while, so please forgive if I commit a mistake.
Alternate explanations are most welcome.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 453
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 70

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 06:37
This is an OG (OG12#74) question and explanation by GMAC, without any change, is as follows.

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 effect when the sentence was written) or the past were allowed (if the agreement was no longer in effect 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. The phrase amount of phosphates is clear and idiomatically correct, whereas phosphate amount is not idiomatic.

A) Had been allowed should be are allowed.
B) The 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) Correct. The 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.

The correct answer is D.
Expert Post
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Preparing for the another shot...!
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1425
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 129

Kudos [?]: 647 [0], given: 62

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 06:51
Expert's post
Thanks for the correct explanation.
But I have one issue here. Since the dumping was being done earlier than 1972, so shouldn't it be "had been"? They were allowed to dump some certain quantity before those alterations, hence I feel this way.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 453
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 70

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 07:04
To elaborate more on option A:

Where there are two events -- one with past perfect and one with simple past -- past perfect denotes the earlier event and simple past denotes later event. "Had been " is used to mean that earlier event is completed when the later event took place.

The sentence here is implying that the agreement was made at a time after the completion of the action dumping, i.e., when no more dumping is going on. But, that is not possible as nobody makes agreement on reducing something which is not existing.

As "had been" is making the dumping non-existent at the time of agreement, option A is wrong.
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce   [#permalink] 08 May 2013, 07:04
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States quasars 0 11 Sep 2006, 20:01
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States mahesh004 0 19 Oct 2005, 09:36
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 wild_desperado 0 17 Jun 2005, 00:30
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  [ 399 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®.