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

 It is currently 27 Jun 2016, 08:28

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Under a provision of constitution that was never applied,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Status: Do and Die!!
Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Posts: 326
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 322 [2] , given: 193

Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2010, 10:21
2
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

58% (01:55) correct 42% (00:54) wrong based on 252 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it.

can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ?

Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to $167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan. A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure [Reveal] Spoiler: OA _________________ I'm the Dumbest of All !! Manager Joined: 24 Aug 2010 Posts: 193 Location: Finland Schools: Admitted: IESE($$),HEC, RSM,Esade WE 1: 3.5 years international Followers: 6 Kudos [?]: 84 [2] , given: 18 Re: it as pronoun. [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Oct 2010, 11:13 2 This post received KUDOS Quote: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it. can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ? The use of "it" is correct and "it" here refers to the act/cause of calling the convention. Quote: Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to$167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan.

A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year
B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year
C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure
D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was
E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure

The use of "which" is wrong because "which" must always modify the noun it follows. So, A and B are out.
C is out because you need to define the "14 percent" by stating what it is.
D is eliminated because the correct adjective to be used in this context is "higher" rather than "more".
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 212
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 13

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2010, 12:43
As said above, Using which is wrong there.
more is wrong there
sale, an amount that ... is right.

therefore, E
Manager
Status: Keep fighting!
Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 236
WE 1: 2+ years - Programming
WE 2: 3+ years - Product developement,
WE 3: 2+ years - Program management
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 351 [0], given: 104

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2010, 19:52
shrive555 wrote:
Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it.

can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ?

It here can refer to the following - "document", "congress", "the provision", "convention".

Shrive555 you also did not write this sentence properly (if your intention was to pick it up as it is in the OG). it should be "the document" not "to document". the former is a noun and the later is a verb infinitive. and changes the meaning of the sentence altogether. So the sentence above can be interpreted in a way where the congress document the amendments and not amend the document.
IT can be used to replace a noun only not an action. So in the above sentence the usage of IT is not appropriate as it can refers to multiple things.

shrive555 wrote:
Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to $167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan. A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure this is a good one and a kudos to you for that. I learnt something from this. Last edited by hemanthp on 18 Oct 2010, 00:06, edited 1 time in total. Senior Manager Status: Do and Die!! Joined: 15 Sep 2010 Posts: 326 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 322 [0], given: 193 Re: it as pronoun. [#permalink] ### Show Tags 17 Oct 2010, 21:58 Heman: that is what i sorted out first that IT refers to multiple of things, but then i thought may be i am wrong. Thanks for your explanation _________________ I'm the Dumbest of All !! Manager Joined: 25 Aug 2010 Posts: 98 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 1 Re: it as pronoun. [#permalink] ### Show Tags 18 Oct 2010, 00:12 wht about the first sentence.... I agree with the 2nd ans ..E Senior Manager Joined: 25 Nov 2011 Posts: 261 Location: India Concentration: Technology, General Management GPA: 3.95 WE: Information Technology (Computer Software) Followers: 3 Kudos [?]: 128 [0], given: 20 Re: it as pronoun. [#permalink] ### Show Tags 31 Dec 2011, 04:12 shekharvineet wrote: Quote: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it. can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ? The use of "it" is correct and "it" here refers to the act/cause of calling the convention. Quote: Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to$167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan.

A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year
B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year
C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure
D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was
E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure

The use of "which" is wrong because "which" must always modify the noun it follows. So, A and B are out.
C is out because you need to define the "14 percent" by stating what it is.
D is eliminated because the correct adjective to be used in this context is "higher" rather than "more".

My reason for eliminating D is not the usage of 'more' but because of incorrect comparison. D compares money with a year whereas by using possessive noun, E correctly compares money with money. Any objections?
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 May 2011
Posts: 317
WE 1: IT 1 Yr
WE 2: Supply Chain 5 Yrs
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 11

Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2011, 08:07
In correct use of which. A, B out.
C has reference error.
D use of more is wrong.
E.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 634
Location: India
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 93

Kudos [?]: 436 [0], given: 78

Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2013, 10:36
Expert's post
Bumping for review and further discussion*.

*New project from GMAT Club!!! Check HERE
_________________

Regards,

S

Consider +1 KUDOS if you find this post useful

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 8040
Followers: 733

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 0

Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2015, 12:23
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.
VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1293
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 706

Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2015, 01:12
shrive555 wrote:
Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it.

can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ?

Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to $167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan. A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure C is wrong because 14 percent can not jump over "in 1992" which is adverb, not modifier of the noun to which 14 percetn modify am I correct? VP Joined: 09 Jun 2010 Posts: 1293 Followers: 3 Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 706 Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, [#permalink] ### Show Tags 06 Sep 2015, 01:19 shrive555 wrote: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, congress has been required to call a convention for possible amendments to document when asked about it. can someone explain if above sentence is right or wrong ? what it refers to ? Sales of United States manufactured goods to non-industrialized countries rose to$167 billion in 1992, which is 14 percent more than the previous year and largely offsets weak demand from Europe and Japan.

A) which is 14 percent more than the previous year
B) which is 14 percent higher than it was the previous year
C) 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure
D) an amount that is 14 percent more than the previous year was
E) an amount that is 14 percent higher than the previous year's figure

a point is tested many times on gmat but no full explantion is given

this point is very hard for non native like me.

in spoken English we say: 167 billion is too much for me. in this case. 167 billion is used as a noun. however, in written English or in the logic think specialized for gmat, the number can not work as a noun. this point of grammar is not expressed in grammar books and the explanation in og is not adequate, a situation make the tons of smart persons fail on gmat

that why we need, "amount" . E is left.
Re: Under a provision of constitution that was never applied,   [#permalink] 06 Sep 2015, 01:19
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 Q. Under a provision of the Constitution that was never 8 16 Aug 2011, 00:44
2 Under the provisions of the United States Constitution and 16 05 Jun 2010, 08:13
9 Under a provision of the Constitution that was never 19 15 Jul 2008, 11:45
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never 3 20 Feb 2008, 05:14
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never 5 02 May 2007, 11:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by