|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3549
Followers: 55
Kudos [?]:
627
[0], given: 781
|
The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to [#permalink]
 21 Aug 2003, 23:22
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:24) wrong based on 1 sessions
The Immigration Service now has the discretionary power to keep families united even though all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement.
(A) all their members do not meet the five-year residency requirement
(B) not all their members meet the five-year residency requirement
(C) all their members have not met the requirement for a five-year residency
(D) not all their members have resided for five years, a requirement
(E) all their members have not resided for five years, as required
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Posts: 142
Location: Hockeytown
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
Are you sure the question doesn't read "...even if" or "...even when? "Though" makes it sound like one isolated case.
At any rate, (A) is a smoother transition between clauses than (B), IMO. (C) - (E) make no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 341
Location: Uruguay
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
IMO it is implied with "keep families together" that only some of the members do not meet the requirements.
Only answers B and D make that distinction. The others suggest that the whole family members do not meet the requirements (in that case they could all be deported together and the family would still be united right?).
Anyway, from B and D I would choose B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Posts: 142
Location: Hockeytown
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
MartinMag wrote: IMO it is implied with "keep families together" that only some of the members do not meet the requirements.
Only answers B and D make that distinction. The others suggest that the whole family members do not meet the requirements (in that case they could all be deported together and the family would still be united right?).
Anyway, from B and D I would choose B.
Hmm...not totally sure I agree with that.
"All members do not meet" is not the same as "No members meet." The constuction at the beginning of (A) is not inconsistent in this regard; it could be argued that the sound is better, because the placement of "not" after "even though" in (B) is awkward, but this wasn't enough to make me choose (B). Call me crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3549
Followers: 55
Kudos [?]:
627
[0], given: 781
|
MartinMag wrote: IMO it is implied with "keep families together" that only some of the members do not meet the requirements.
Only answers B and D make that distinction. The others suggest that the whole family members do not meet the requirements (in that case they could all be deported together and the family would still be united right?).
Anyway, from B and D I would choose B.
Your explanation is right.
For this one , the official answer is B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 773
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
JP wrote: MartinMag wrote: IMO it is implied with "keep families together" that only some of the members do not meet the requirements.
Only answers B and D make that distinction. The others suggest that the whole family members do not meet the requirements (in that case they could all be deported together and the family would still be united right?).
Anyway, from B and D I would choose B. Hmm...not totally sure I agree with that. "All members do not meet" is not the same as "No members meet." The constuction at the beginning of (A) is not inconsistent in this regard; it could be argued that the sound is better, because the placement of "not" after "even though" in (B) is awkward, but this wasn't enough to make me choose (B). Call me crazy. Funny you should say that. In collequial English, you are right. HOWEVER, in ETS-speak, "all do not meet" means exactly that -- EVERYONE does not meet (i.e., NOBODY meets).. This is important to know for CR questions.
However, this is also relevant for SC questions. Also, in colloquial English, one can argue that A and B are equivalent; however, B has the stronger connotation of "some, but not all", hence, its meaning is clearer and thus the better choice of the two.
_________________
Best,
AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Posts: 73
Location: USA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: SC 55-5 Akamai..please comment [#permalink]
27 Oct 2003, 10:45
Clearly A has no problem with meaning, right!
But B changes the meaning of A even though B sound more logical based on life experience BUT it changes the meaning.
Under ETS, changing meaning is unacceptable.
_________________
I have 2 month for gmat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 773
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
Changing the meaning is acceptable if it changes that meaning from an ambiguous or unreasonable interpretation, to one that makes sense. (i.e., the original sentence was bad).
_________________
Best,
AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn, GetThisDone
|
close
