|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 563
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
21
[0], given: 2
|
The new regulations mandate that a company allows their [#permalink]
 10 Jan 2009, 14:48
Question Stats:
11% (00:00) correct
88% (00:40) wrong based on 1 sessions
The new regulations mandate that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue the same insurance at their own expense for a specific period.
(A) that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(B) companies to allow their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage that they can continue
(C) that a company allow its retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(D) companies allowing a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
(E) companies to allow a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2008
Posts: 180
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
21
[0], given: 0
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
10 Jan 2009, 15:55
The new regulations mandate that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue the same insurance at their own expense for a specific period.
A) that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(B) companies to allow their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage that they can continue
(C) that a company allow its retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(D) companies allowing a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
(E) companies to allow a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
C.
A/B refer companies as their , should be its
D/E "coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation" of is awkward and incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 244
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
10 Jan 2009, 16:31
yes company is one and the retiring employee should belong to it; therefore E is out since it does not associate retiring employee to the company. ConkergMat wrote: The new regulations mandate that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue the same insurance at their own expense for a specific period.
A) that a company allows their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(B) companies to allow their retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage that they can continue
(C) that a company allow its retiring employees who would otherwise lose group health care coverage to continue
(D) companies allowing a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
(E) companies to allow a retiring employee whose group health care coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation of
C.
A/B refer companies as their , should be its
D/E "coverage would otherwise be lost the continuation" of is awkward and incorrect.
_________________
-----------------------
tusharvk
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 563
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
21
[0], given: 2
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
10 Jan 2009, 16:56
I am confused....how "a company allow" is right? is S-V agreement ok in C? I am not agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 1
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
02 Sep 2009, 02:29
I got to say that option in A is having "A company allows" which is actually correct since allows is a singular verb.
Looking at option C it says that "A company allow " here allow is not a singular verb since this statement refers to "A company "
How would we come to a conclusion regarding this other than deciding "their" and "its" in these statements.
I chose A......
Can anyone give me reasons now to evaluate this argument..Will be most helpful since i am taking gmat on sep5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Posts: 168
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 8
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
04 Sep 2009, 02:54
reply2spg wrote: I am confused....how "a company allow" is right? is S-V agreement ok in C? I am not agree I think allow is rigght here..teh sentence is in subjunctive mood....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 May 2009
Posts: 317
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
33
[0], given: 13
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
04 Sep 2009, 07:29
subjunctive mood and I think mandate should be followed by "that"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 03:09
Is there a grammar rule that makes "allows" here to be "allow" following mandate? Normally, option A should be correct. So, I am guessing that mandate to allow is somehow a grammar exception. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 04:16
kshojaei wrote: Is there a grammar rule that makes "allows" here to be "allow" following mandate? Normally, option A should be correct. So, I am guessing that mandate to allow is somehow a grammar exception. Any ideas? "Demand" is a subjunctive verb. Look for "subjunctive verbs + gmat" on google, and you will find the answer 
_________________
"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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: ready to boMBArd
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 493
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V40
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
31
[0], given: 67
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 04:25
I go with C as it uses correct command subjunctive mood. Please post OA.
_________________
My GMAT debrief: from-620-to-710-my-gmat-journey-114437.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
Posts: 192
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 4
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 05:52
I went with C for Subject -Verb agreement. 'A Company' and 'its' agree with each other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 190
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 20
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 09:31
C. Mandate is bossy/imperative verb. So it requires construction similar to that in C. By connecting 'retiring employees' to 'their' in non-underlined part, the sentence provides intended meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Status: Admitted
Affiliations: Chicago Booth
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 947
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
143
[0], given: 123
|
Re: The new regulations mandate [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 22:46
C should have allows since company is plural (its is singular and so company allows NOT allow)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The new regulations mandate
[#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 22:46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, Marcab, Narenn, GetThisDone
|
close
