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

It is currently 18 Dec 2014, 06:35

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

In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 329
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 29 Sep 2007, 12:17
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

93% (02:18) correct 7% (01:04) wrong based on 16 sessions
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs, a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

A. a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing
B. a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive but also by the fact that doctors are writing
C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written
D. which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also writing
E. which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also written

I picked A....debated over A & E..........i think i shud have picked E...views???
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1465
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 0

Re: SC - SET 23 Q39 [#permalink] New post 29 Sep 2007, 13:02
singh_amit19 wrote:
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs, a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

A. a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing
B. a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive but also by the fact that doctors are writing
C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written
D. which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also writing
E. which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also written

I picked A....debated over A & E..........i think i shud have picked E...views???


B in my opinion.
My understanding is that you cannot separate "but also" part of the idiom. Although B uses "not just", I feel that this is the best choice. I have seen some other construction as well such as "not...but also" and it is correct.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 586
Location: Canada eh
Followers: 7

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Sep 2007, 16:40
I have no idea.



Not Only / But Also is the correct idiom.

Not X / But Also is wrong


Not X / But X is correct.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 586
Location: Canada eh
Followers: 7

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Sep 2007, 16:41
Also 'which' is wrong.

Which directly refers to the subject preceding it

You have to make a new reference to the idea you're referring to, ie a phenomenon. So it's A-C. I wouldn't pick C. So A/B.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2593
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 210 [0], given: 0

Re: SC - SET 23 Q39 [#permalink] New post 29 Sep 2007, 22:41
singh_amit19 wrote:
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs, a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.

A. a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing
B. a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive but also by the fact that doctors are writing
C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written
D. which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also writing
E. which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also written

I picked A....debated over A & E..........i think i shud have picked E...views???


This is a very strange SC. Idioms are out of whack all over the place.

My choice B b/c ||ism is maintained.

"by the fact that drugs are becoming.... but also by the fact that doctors are writing
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 367
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 291

Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 15 Nov 2013, 19:01
The options are really crazy but I guess the GMAT also asks us to pick the least crazy option sometimes. :-)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2013
Posts: 113
Schools: ISB '15
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 54

Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 15 Nov 2013, 23:06
B.

A. a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing - Not just because of X but by the fact Y--incorrect
B. a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive but also by the fact that doctors are writing - Not just by X but also by Y -- Correct

C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written - Not just beacuase of drugs ...but (also is reqd) because of Doctors ---incorrect
D. which occurred not just because drugs are becoming more expensive but doctors are also writing -- which is incorrect
E. which occurred not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also written -- which is incorrect
_________________

Veritas Prep - 650
MGMAT 1 590
MGMAT 2 640 (V48/Q31)

Please help the community by giving Kudos.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 77
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 36

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 19 Nov 2013, 06:03
geetchandratre wrote:
singh_amit19 wrote:
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs, a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.


C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written --> Correct


The answer is C.


Definitely not C.

drugs that are becoming more expensive- This wrongly suggests that there are other drugs that are not becoming expensive. There is a whole world of difference between "drugs are becoming expensive" and "drugs that are becoming expensive".

Not X But Y suggests a contrast. Which, in this case, means the phenomenon is not caused by the drugs but is caused by doctors prescribing them. Which is nonsensical. Also, Not Just X but Y is WRONG.

Hence C can definitely be not the answer!
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

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

Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 19 Nov 2013, 06:15
anilisanil wrote:
geetchandratre wrote:
singh_amit19 wrote:
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the increase in spending on prescription drugs, a phenomenon that is explained not just because of more expensive drugs but by the fact that doctors are writing many more prescriptions for higher-cost drugs.


C. a phenomenon occurring not just because of drugs that are becoming more expensive but because of doctors having also written --> Correct


The answer is C.


Definitely not C.

drugs that are becoming more expensive- This wrongly suggests that there are other drugs that are not becoming expensive. There is a whole world of difference between "drugs are becoming expensive" and "drugs that are becoming expensive".

Not X But Y suggests a contrast. Which, in this case, means the phenomenon is not caused by the drugs but is caused by doctors prescribing them. Which is nonsensical. Also, Not Just X but Y is WRONG.

Hence C can definitely be not the answer!


Not X But Y
Not only X, BUT also Y
Not (Just because of drugs) X, But (because of......) Y
The idiom is infact correct.
The aim of SC is to select the BEST answer, and not always the completely CORRECT answer.
As we can easily rule out rest of the answers, C is the BEST answer.
I hope this helps. http://www.platinumgmat.com/about_gmat/ ... idiom_list
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 77
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 36

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 19 Nov 2013, 17:34
geetchandratre wrote:
anilisanil wrote:
geetchandratre wrote:

The answer is C.


Definitely not C.

drugs that are becoming more expensive- This wrongly suggests that there are other drugs that are not becoming expensive. There is a whole world of difference between "drugs are becoming expensive" and "drugs that are becoming expensive".

Not X But Y suggests a contrast. Which, in this case, means the phenomenon is not caused by the drugs but is caused by doctors prescribing them. Which is nonsensical. Also, Not Just X but Y is WRONG.

Hence C can definitely be not the answer!


Not X But Y
Not only X, BUT also Y
Not (Just because of drugs) X, But (because of......) Y
The idiom is infact correct.
The aim of SC is to select the BEST answer, and not always the completely CORRECT answer.
As we can easily rule out rest of the answers, C is the BEST answer.
I hope this helps. http://www.platinumgmat.com/about_gmat/ ... idiom_list


Hi, I don't have any doubt to conclude that C is not the best answer. I clearly mentioned the reasons for you to think about.

If you are convinced that C is the answer, then good for you.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 119
Schools: IIMA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 65

CAT Tests
Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 28 Jun 2014, 10:48
B is correct here maintains parallelism

a phenomenon that is explained not just by the fact that drugs are becoming more expensive but also by the fact that doctors are writing

wrong use of which in d and e . A is out passive sentence and between b and C ; b won the race :)
_________________

If you are not over prepared then you are under prepared !!!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 331
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 23

Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the [#permalink] New post 25 Jul 2014, 14:06
Can someone please explain why D and E are NOT parallel?

D) Not just because -- drugs are becoming xxx but (because-implied) doctors are also writing
E) Not just because of more expensive drugs but because doctors have also written
Re: In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the   [#permalink] 25 Jul 2014, 14:06
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the ajmalshams 0 25 Jul 2013, 11:16
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for tcsing 18 09 Jan 2013, 02:12
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the perfectstranger 4 22 Jul 2012, 05:06
7 In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the gregspirited 7 07 Dec 2007, 03:49
In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the cookie00 3 20 Aug 2006, 16:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In 2000, a mere two dozen products accounted for half the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

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®.