Responding to the public’s fascination with―and sometimes undue alarm

Hey All,

I got asked to take this one on by private message, so here I am! This one has me a bit confused. I don't see how the OA can be C. Where is this question from?

Responding to the public’s fascination with-and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.

A. a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may
PROBLEM: "Responding to..." is a participial phrase modifying a noun, so the noun has to come right after the comma. The astronomers responded, not the scale.

B. a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to
PROBLEM: Same as above.

C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
PROBLEM: You can't say "likely...will be to". It's gibberish. Your ear would recognize that if there weren't all those words in between, confusing things. Try a short example. You should always be able to replace "likely" with "probably".

My program determines how likely you will be to love me.
My program determines how probably you will be to love me...MAKES NO SENSE!

D. astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will
ANSWER

E. astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may
PROBLEM: You can't have a likelihood of something that may happen. It's the likelihood that something WILL happen.

Hope that helps!

-t

For those who are confused between the options C and D, please read the Ron's explanation below,

Responding to the public’s fascination with-and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.
C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
D. astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will

In choosing between C and D, first consider the intended meaning. We're interested in the current likelihood that the comet/asteroid will strike Earth in the future..
In other words, How likely is it NOW that a comet/asteroid WILL STRIKE Earth?

This distinction comes into play when you look at the verbs in C and D. Different verbs.

C mentions "how likely a comet/asteroid will be". Nope. The likelihood is something that exists now, not in the future. (That's the definition of "likelihood": How probable does this event seem right now?
There's no "future likelihood" here. In the future, the event either happens or doesn't happen.)

D mentions the likelihood (as measured at present) that a comet/asteroid will collide (in the future) with Earth. That makes sense.

Hey Zatarra,

First point. There are a few ways to use the word "likely", (one as a fill in for "probably": He is likely going to eat the chicken; one as a fill in for "probably going to": He is likely to eat the chicken; and one a fill-in for simply "probable": "It is likely."), but the sentence above uses it incorrectly in all senses. You can't talk about "how likely X will be to happen." You say "X is likely to happen." Or "Let's see how likely X is to happen." Not WILL BE.

Second point. None of your examples go against what I said. You can't have a likelihood of something THAT MAY HAPPEN. That's how it's put in answer choice E, "the likelihood of X that may happen."

-t

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that astronomers have responded to the public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids by developing a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will collide with Earth.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Tenses + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• In a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.
• Information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense.
• The simple future tense is used to refer to actions that will take place in the future.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses "Responding to...asteroids" to modify "a scale", illogically implying that the scale responded to the public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids; the intended meaning is that astronomers responded to public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option A redundantly uses "may" alongside "likelihood", leading to awkwardness and redundancy; the usage is redundant, as both terms convey a sense of uncertainty.

B: This answer choice incorrectly uses "Responding to...asteroids" to modify "a scale", illogically implying that the scale responded to the public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids; the intended meaning is that astronomers responded to public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option B uses the needlessly wordy phrases "that astronomers have developed" and "how likely it is for", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple future tense verb phrase "how likely...will be" to refer to information that is permanent in nature; please remember, information that is permanent in nature is best conveyed through the simple present tense, and the simple future tense is used to refer to actions that will take place in the future. Further, Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase "how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D: Correct. This answer choice correctly uses "Responding to...asteroids" to modify "astronomers" and uses the phrase "the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will" - conveying the intended meaning - that astronomers have responded to the public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids by developing a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will collide with Earth. Further, Option D avoids the tense error seen in Option C, as it uses the noun phrase "the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will" rather than an active verb phrase. Additionally, Option D is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

E: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may"; the construction of this phrase leads to an incoherent meaning; the intended meaning is that astronomers have responded to the public’s fascination with possible threats from asteroids by developing a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will collide with Earth.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Phrase Comma Subject" and "Subject Comma Phrase" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

Hi Tommy, you said that one should always be able to replace likely with probably.
But if you consider the following sentence, the above does not hold true

Courtesy :https://www.yourdictionary.com/examples/likely
He is likely to win the contest
He is probably to win the contest

Also you said
PROBLEM: You can't have a likelihood of something that may happen. It's the likelihood that something WILL happen.
But if you consider the following sentence you will find a few examples where the above does not hold true.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/examples/likelihood

Do search results lead to a likelihood of confusion?
The report notes that recent research has found that programs for offenders with drinking problems can reduce the likelihood of re-offending.
The likelihood of this happening outside three kilometer protection zones is very low.
The output of the risk analysis is an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each possible outcome.

Please explain. This is getting murkier. Thank you.
_________________

Responding to the public’s fascination with - and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale
developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.

it will modify a noun-scientist ; further 'likelihood that' -idiom , took 30 second to answer it

Hope that helps:)

Responding to the public’s fascination with - and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale
developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.

A. a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may >> Wrong modifier
B. a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to >> Wrong modifier
C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to >> "to" is wrong
D. astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will >>> correct choice
E. astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may >> likelihood and may can't be together

A quick way..to distinguish C/D/E

C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
Have you ever read/heard anyone say "will be to"? Nope..yea that's because it's purely ungrammatical.
D. astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will
likelihood that a particular asteroid = any potential asteroid (that's coming to get us!)
E. astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may
likelihood of a particular asteriod = we are only looking at 1 asteroid - KSPHMD1337. Astronomers from MIT are probably smarter than that and it is highly unlikely that they will make a scale JUST to measure 1 asteroid......unless it's the one in The Expanse.

Responding to the public’s fascination with - and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.

A. a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may - responding seems to modify a scale, implying that A SCALE is responding to the public's fascination. -- Modifier issue
B. a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to - same as A
C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to - Here, the future tense is misused.
Incorrect: John will be likely to win the game.
Correct: John IS likely to win the game.
The present tense is required because we calculate likelihoods given information CURRENTLY available.
D. astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will - Correct
E. astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may - Not the intended meaning: the scale does not rate whether the asteroid ITSELF is likely.
The purpose of the scale is to rate the probability of a future ACTION: whether a particular asteroid WILL COLLIDE with Earth.

Answer D
_________________

Can you please explain the usage difference between Likelihood of and Likelihood that

Likelihood of is followed by a noun, whereas likelihood that is followed by a clause. For example:

1. The likelihood that the country will withdraw from the treaty... ← This talks about the likelihood of the whole thing ("the country will withdraw from the treaty").
2. The likelihood of the country that will withdraw from the treaty... ← This one talks about the likelihood of the country itself, which is not what we want to say.
_________________

hello ,why in option D " a scale for rating" is not wrong ? Is " a scale to rate " better?

I think that a scale for rating sounds better than a scale to rate, but both should be fine.
_________________

Would (C) astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to have been fixed if we removed "be to"?

I understand likely normally warrants a present - How likely is it to rain today? But can there ever be a case where likely can take "will"? Can we GENERALISE this rule? Thinking out aloud -

1. How likely will Lewis Hamilton collide into Sebastian Vettel next week?
2. How likely is Lewis Hamilton to collide into Sebastian Vettel next week?
3. How likely will Lewis Hamilton be to smoke next year?

GMATNinja, AjiteshArun

anud33p That fix for C won't work, and neither will #1 in your set. In its more common usages, "likely" actually doesn't apply to past, present, or future verbs. It doesn't apply to "will" or "be." Why not? Simple. "Likely" is normally an adjective, not an adverb! We can say "How likely is it?" in the same sense that we can say "How spicy is the food?"

If you rearrange your questions 2 and 3 into statements, maybe you'll see what I mean:

2-Lewis is likely to collide into Sebastian.
3-Lewis will be likely to smoke.

Notice that we could replace "likely" with another adjective, such as "willing" or "unable."

Now, if we rearrange #1, we get something interesting:

1-Lewis will likely collide into Sebastian.

Here, "likely" comes in the middle of a verb phrase ("will collide"), so it can't be an adjective. It has to be an adverb modifying the verb phrase. Believe it or not, this is okay! "Likely" can also appear as an adverb. (English is so endlessly complicated . . . ) So why doesn't question 1 (or your rewrite of C) work? Because in this form, "likely" works like "probably," and we can't ask "How probably will H happen?" We can say that something will likely/probably happen, and we can ask if it is likely/probable to happen. We can also ask HOW likely/probable it is to happen. But "how probably" is not a thing. In their adverb form, these words do not take degrees of likelihood. It would be like asking "How mostly do you work from home?"
_________________

i can agree with likelihood being a better option over likely.

But how is "for rating" justified over "to rate"?

or just because OA is D, so everyone is finding ways to prove it correct? What about idioms? Being told that the "to rate" form is mostly preferred over the -ing form? Suddenly rely on what "sounds' and feels" better! Not trying to stir up a controversy, but certainly no one has a clear response as to why D is the preferred option over C.

saumya2805 You're right that "to rate" isn't inherently wrong. However, if you go back to the beginning of the thread, you'll find that C has been thoroughly knocked out on meaning grounds, and that's all we need.
_________________

Does that placement of "That" change anything?

(D) astronomers have developed a scale for rating the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet will

(E) astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may

Hi, whenever we have Verb+Ing Modifier, can we assume that the sentence be in Present tense? Please help