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

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 15:21

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

The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 88
Concentration: General Management, Leadership
Schools: Thunderbird '15
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 8

The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 20 Apr 2011, 18:20
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

61% (02:03) correct 39% (00:58) wrong based on 309 sessions
The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge to impose an injunction against the hardware manufacturer, arguing that they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client.

a) they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client
b) the judge act immediately in order to prevent the client from suffering further damages of an economic nature
c) they should act immediately to prevent further economic damages being suffered by the client
d) the judge act immediately in order to prevent them from suffering economic damages further
e) immediate action should be taken to prevent their client from suffering further economic damages

What is wrong with B?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 285
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 13

Re: Lawyers Argument [#permalink] New post 20 Apr 2011, 20:16
a. who is they? lawyers? Federal judges? Manufacturer? or Federal judges and manufacturer togther? use of 'they' is creating ambiguity here
b. judge is made the agent of action, moreover 'from suffering further damages of an economic nature ' is very wordy - 'damages of an econmic nature' means 'economic damages'- use of such convoluted language makes this option incorrect.
c. similar to a, wrong use of they. also further damages being suffered is wrong. If the damages are further (in future, more than current) than how can they be 'being suffered' right now. being is continuous form, and is used wrongly here.
d. prevent whom? ambiguous use of them.
e. use of their here has a clear antecedent- lawyers. correct option.
Expert Post
6 KUDOS received
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 126
Followers: 47

Kudos [?]: 182 [6] , given: 1

Re: Lawyers Argument [#permalink] New post 25 Apr 2011, 22:41
6
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
As vivesomnium noted above, "they" is a problem in both A, C, and D-- the only plural antecedent in the sentence is "lawyers." Clearly ,the intended meaning of the sentence is *not* that lawyers should act or be saved from economic damages. Or you could say that there is potential to group the lawyers and judge together into a plural unit, rendering the pronoun ambiguous. In either case, knock those choices out.

B (and D) contain another issue, though. See that front-end split among the answer choices? "They should" and "the judge act" both appear twice.

That word, "should," might have triggered a red-flag in your head-- we're in the realm of SUBJUNCTIVES!

Remember there are certain words (we call them "bossy verbs") that require the subjunctive mood. Verbs that indicate desire, suggestions, orders, etc. fall into that "bossy verb" category and require the command subjunctive. To construct the command subjunctive, take the infinitive form and cross off the "to."

He demanded that she [strike]to[/strike] STOP the car.
She required that he [strike]to[/strike] START the class on time.
Carl should [strike]to[/strike] BE the best man at your wedding.

B and D incorrectly attempt to apply the command subjunctive! The verb (or verbal, here, since "arguing" has a modifier function not a working-verb function) is NOT a "bossy" verb. Arguing isn't pleasant, but it's a back-and-forth process, not a one-way request or order.

That only leaves E, which CORRECTLY uses the subjunctive "should BE" and unambiguously uses the pronoun "their" to refer back to "lawyers."

Hope this helps.
_________________


JP Park | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Los Angeles

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 285
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 13

Re: Lawyers Argument [#permalink] New post 25 Apr 2011, 22:49
A very good point.. certainly helpful :)
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 101
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V31
WE: Supply Chain Management (Military & Defense)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 5

Re: Lawyers Argument [#permalink] New post 09 May 2011, 03:35
parker wrote:
As vivesomnium noted above, "they" is a problem in both A, C, and D-- the only plural antecedent in the sentence is "lawyers." Clearly ,the intended meaning of the sentence is *not* that lawyers should act or be saved from economic damages. Or you could say that there is potential to group the lawyers and judge together into a plural unit, rendering the pronoun ambiguous. In either case, knock those choices out.

B (and D) contain another issue, though. See that front-end split among the answer choices? "They should" and "the judge act" both appear twice.

That word, "should," might have triggered a red-flag in your head-- we're in the realm of SUBJUNCTIVES!

Remember there are certain words (we call them "bossy verbs") that require the subjunctive mood. Verbs that indicate desire, suggestions, orders, etc. fall into that "bossy verb" category and require the command subjunctive. To construct the command subjunctive, take the infinitive form and cross off the "to."

He demanded that she [strike]to[/strike] STOP the car.
She required that he [strike]to[/strike] START the class on time.
Carl should [strike]to[/strike] BE the best man at your wedding.

B and D incorrectly attempt to apply the command subjunctive! The verb (or verbal, here, since "arguing" has a modifier function not a working-verb function) is NOT a "bossy" verb. Arguing isn't pleasant, but it's a back-and-forth process, not a one-way request or order.

That only leaves E, which CORRECTLY uses the subjunctive "should BE" and unambiguously uses the pronoun "their" to refer back to "lawyers."

Hope this helps.


this has helped...

i made 3-4 mistake earlier because of word "argue" and that construction.

i wll go e
_________________

lets start again

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 348
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 76 [1] , given: 12

Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 06 Jun 2013, 22:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
kannn wrote:
The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge to impose an injunction against the hardware manufacturer, arguing that they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client.

a) they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client
b) the judge act immediately in order to prevent the client from suffering further damages of an economic nature
c) they should act immediately to prevent further economic damages being suffered by the client
d) the judge act immediately in order to prevent them from suffering economic damages further
e) immediate action should be taken to prevent their client from suffering further economic damages

What is wrong with B?


B changes the original meaning. It is suggesting that their could be other kind of damages as well. E is is the crystal clear answer.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 43
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT Date: 08-25-2013
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 8

The lawyers for the patent holder [#permalink] New post 28 Jun 2013, 06:42
The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge to impose an injunction against the hardware manufacturer, arguing that they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client.

A)they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client
B)the judge act immediately in order to prevent the client from suffering further damages of an economic nature
C)they should act immediately to prevent further economic damages being suffered by the client
D)the judge act immediately in order to prevent them from suffering economic damages further
E)immediate action should be taken to prevent their client from suffering further economic damages

Last edited by Zarrolou on 28 Jun 2013, 06:46, edited 2 times in total.
Merging similar topics.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Posts: 157
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT Date: 08-01-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 29

Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2013, 23:07
How to know that " their" in option E is not referring to Hardware manufacture? Is there some rule? :?
_________________

"Where are my Kudos" ............ Good Question = kudos

"Start enjoying all phases" & all Sections

__________________________________________________________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/collection-of-articles-on-critical-reasoning-159959.html

percentages-700-800-level-questions-130588.html

700-to-800-level-quant-question-with-detail-soluition-143321.html

GMAT Pill Representative
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 346
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 140

Kudos [?]: 186 [0], given: 4

Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2013, 23:31
HI Mountain,

It's not so much about a rule. But rather looking at a sentence logically and seeing what it could mean.

In this instance if you read E there is nothing to suggest (logically) that 'their' doesn't refer to lawyers.

In a correct sentence, you can guarantee no ambiguity.

James
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0



... and more

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Posts: 157
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT Date: 08-01-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 29

Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2013, 00:12
plumber250 wrote:
HI Mountain,

It's not so much about a rule. But rather looking at a sentence logically and seeing what it could mean.

In this instance if you read E there is nothing to suggest (logically) that 'their' doesn't refer to lawyers.

In a correct sentence, you can guarantee no ambiguity.

James



This really confuses me big time..... :( ...

In A and C- " they" is ambiguous and do not have clear antecedent but when it comes to " their" it need to be logically thought...

Anyways, thanks James... probably... more practice is required... :(
_________________

"Where are my Kudos" ............ Good Question = kudos

"Start enjoying all phases" & all Sections

__________________________________________________________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/collection-of-articles-on-critical-reasoning-159959.html

percentages-700-800-level-questions-130588.html

700-to-800-level-quant-question-with-detail-soluition-143321.html

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 838
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Followers: 37

Kudos [?]: 612 [0], given: 197

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2013, 00:27
Mountain14 wrote:


This really confuses me big time..... :( ...

In A and C- " they" is ambiguous and do not have clear antecedent but when it comes to " their" it need to be logically thought...

Anyways, thanks James... probably... more practice is required... :(


hi,

the problem is in meaning..it is not like they is ambiguous....
meaning of sentence is:

The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge to impose an injunction against the hardware manufacturer, arguing that they should take immediate action in order to prevent further economic damages against their client.

THE LAWYERS(plural)===>THESE PEOPLE ARE PRESEEING FEDERAL JUDGE(SINGULAR) to impose ....against HARDWARE MANUFACTURER(SINGULAR)...

LAWYER IS ARGUING that THEY should take action......==>according to meaning who are supposed to take action....obviously FEDERAL JUDGE...WHICH IS SINGULAR....but here THEY is written to represent federal judge....thats why option A is wrong.

in option C:
c) they should act immediately to prevent further economic damages being suffered by the client ===>..IN THIS again THEY Should represent federal judge...same error as A....SINGULAR PLURAL mismatch

IN OPTION E

e) immediate action should be taken to prevent their client from suffering further economic damages===>in this case===>their clients===>whose clients are suffering ....IT IS THE LAWYERS client....and their is no other client....SINCE IT IS LAWYERS (PLURAL) CLIENT....hence THEIR (PLURAL PRONOUN)==>THIS IS CLEARLY REFERING TO LAWYERS..

hope its clear
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...



GMAT RCs VOCABULARY LIST: vocabulary-list-for-gmat-reading-comprehension-155228.html
learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... assessment
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APt9ITygGss

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 2294
Followers: 276

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2014, 13:26
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 465
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 58

CAT Tests
Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge [#permalink] New post 25 Sep 2014, 23:41
parker wrote:
As vivesomnium noted above, "they" is a problem in both A, C, and D-- the only plural antecedent in the sentence is "lawyers." Clearly ,the intended meaning of the sentence is *not* that lawyers should act or be saved from economic damages. Or you could say that there is potential to group the lawyers and judge together into a plural unit, rendering the pronoun ambiguous. In either case, knock those choices out.

B (and D) contain another issue, though. See that front-end split among the answer choices? "They should" and "the judge act" both appear twice.

That word, "should," might have triggered a red-flag in your head-- we're in the realm of SUBJUNCTIVES!

Remember there are certain words (we call them "bossy verbs") that require the subjunctive mood. Verbs that indicate desire, suggestions, orders, etc. fall into that "bossy verb" category and require the command subjunctive. To construct the command subjunctive, take the infinitive form and cross off the "to."

He demanded that she to STOP the car.
She required that he to START the class on time.
Carl should to BE the best man at your wedding.

B and D incorrectly attempt to apply the command subjunctive! The verb (or verbal, here, since "arguing" has a modifier function not a working-verb function) is NOT a "bossy" verb. Arguing isn't pleasant, but it's a back-and-forth process, not a one-way request or order.

That only leaves E, which CORRECTLY uses the subjunctive "should BE" and unambiguously uses the pronoun "their" to refer back to "lawyers."

Hope this helps.

Is there a list of moods that require the use of the subjunctive?
I thought that argue was one of them....
Re: The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge   [#permalink] 25 Sep 2014, 23:41
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Experts publish their posts in the topic Profile evaluation of a PhD holder tun56hy 1 09 Sep 2013, 06:44
2 Experts publish their posts in the topic HKUST in the Press bb 0 03 Apr 2013, 21:43
Intellectual property laws protect patent holders from anin 12 09 Jul 2010, 11:06
Patent in an Essay SV6 4 24 Oct 2008, 09:20
Patents nischalb 4 03 Nov 2006, 21:31
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The lawyers for the patent holder pressed the federal judge

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.