|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2010
Posts: 72
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 4
|
Difficult sc question [#permalink]
 18 Feb 2010, 22:06
Question Stats:
37% (02:02) correct
62% (01:18) wrong based on 0 sessions
Can someone explain how to tackle this one
That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault: researcher Sam Daniels, one of the leading experts on the virus, reported a quarter-century ago that the virus was effectively contained and that no action beyond education was necessary.
1)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault
2)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued to be at fault
3)It cannot plausibly be argued that it is the fault of individuals who were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence
4)It cannot plausibly be argued that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence
5)The fact that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 04 Feb 2010
Posts: 19
Location: Rockville,MD
Schools: Kellog,Georgetown,OSU
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
18 Feb 2010, 22:39
I think the answer is D because first two (A &B) are not matching (That many individuals). E seems too wordy.
So, C and D could be the answer. But C has it is the fault which seems wordy. So, my final answer is D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 349
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
24
[0], given: 10
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
18 Feb 2010, 22:43
My pic is D I read this sentence like this :- researcher Sam Daniels, one of the leading experts on the virus, reported a quarter-century ago that the virus was effectively contained and that no action beyond education was necessary.So,It cannot plausibly be argued that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence
_________________
Always tag your question
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2010
Posts: 72
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 4
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
19 Feb 2010, 06:19
Thanks guys . D is indeed right. Do u think that this is a tough one ?? Posted from my mobile device 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 552
WE 1: Investment Banking - 6yrs
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
39
[0], given: 92
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
19 Feb 2010, 06:27
It was tough for me and took time (2 mins).
I picked D, though.
same reasoning as, bgrocker79
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 84
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
27
[0], given: 20
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
19 Feb 2010, 14:11
zest4mba wrote: Can someone explain how to tackle this one
That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault: researcher Sam Daniels, one of the leading experts on the virus, reported a quarter-century ago that the virus was effectively contained and that no action beyond education was necessary.
1)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault
2)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued to be at fault
3)It cannot plausibly be argued that it is the fault of individuals who were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence
4)It cannot plausibly be argued that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence
5)The fact that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued My answer is also D. A and B have an awkward construction. When a sentence begins with "That....is (or do) something...." it almost always should be changed with "It....that...". E is wordy and difficult to understand because there is a long modifier between "The fact..." and "...cannot be plausibly understand." C is wordy compared to D: "...it is the fault of individuals..." vs "...individuals are at fault..". Thus, we have D. I think the question is difficult enough and takes some efforts to find the correct answer. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Posts: 282
Schools: HBS, Stanford, Haas, Ross, Cornell, LBS, INSEAD, Oxford, IESE/IE
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
99
[0], given: 117
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
19 Feb 2010, 15:01
I picked D just read it in reverse, only D makes sense. A & B are because of "that many individuals......an not plausibly be argued that it is" is awkward, instead it should come before plausibly be argued thatC is wordy as compared to D so out. In E unnecessary addition of "the fact that" So it leaves D as a best choice.
_________________
"Don't be afraid of the space between your dreams and reality. If you can dream it, you can make it so."
Target=780
http://challengemba.blogspot.com
Kudos??
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1756
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 50
Kudos [?]:
145
[0], given: 108
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
07 Apr 2011, 15:20
+1 D The first "it" is a placeholder.
_________________
"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."
My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jan 2011
Posts: 244
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 4
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
07 Apr 2011, 15:59
zest4mba wrote: Thanks guys . D is indeed right. Do u think that this is a tough one ?? Posted from my mobile device woah!! D makes sense ... but "wordy but correct" option caught my eye first ... any good trick to get these correct .. may be not!!
_________________
Good Luck!!!
***Help and be helped!!!****
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 286
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
88
[0], given: 10
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
10 Apr 2011, 22:58
"C. It cannot plausibly be argued that it is the fault of individuals who were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence"
C is wrong not only because it is wordy - it is gramatically incorrect as well.
I think for C to be correct it will have to replace 'who' with 'that' - "It cannot plausibly be argued that it is the fault of individuals that they were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence"
In the current form the sentence doesnt complete the meaning - it says who is at fault but it doesnt say what is the fault(that they were not vaccinated)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 02 Mar 2011
Posts: 81
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 38
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
11 Apr 2011, 04:01
does anyone feel that "for not receiving vaccination" in option D is slightly changing the meaning of original
"were not vaccinated" vs "for not receiving vaccination"?
any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: It's "Go" Time.......
Affiliations: N.C.C.
Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 182
Location: India
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Difficult sc question [#permalink]
18 Apr 2011, 17:48
Got "D" in 1:32 Explanations are next to each option zest4mba wrote: Can someone explain how to tackle this one
That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault: researcher Sam Daniels, one of the leading experts on the virus, reported a quarter-century ago that the virus was effectively contained and that no action beyond education was necessary.
1)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued that it is their fault Too ambiguous, also it uses passive voice where it is not needed
2)That many individuals were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued to be at fault Wrong use of passive voice "were not vaccinated"
3)It cannot plausibly be argued that it is the fault of individuals who were not vaccinated against the virus before its resurgence "very close to the correct choice only odd against it is that it uses passive voice"
4)It cannot plausibly be argued that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence "Best choice"
5)The fact that individuals are at fault for not receiving vaccination against the virus before its resurgence cannot plausibly be argued "Subject-The fact & verb-can be argued are far apart not an ideal choice"
_________________
We are twice armed if we fight with faith.
He who knows when he can fight & when He can't will be victorious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Difficult sc question
[#permalink]
18 Apr 2011, 17:48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, Marcab, Narenn, GetThisDone
|
close
