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

It is currently 18 Dec 2014, 06:35

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

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 220 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 10:45
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

81% (02:15) correct 19% (01:42) wrong based on 77 sessions
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 283
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 0

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 10:54
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps
_________________

The world is continuous, but the mind is discrete

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 277
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 11:05
Just another rule, place the modifies as close as possible to the clause that modifies it. Hence D. Whereby is just redundent here.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1434
Followers: 35

Kudos [?]: 238 [0], given: 1

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 11:06
where by is clearly redundant. If you ask the Q Under a provision of the Constitution that has never been applied, it should modify congress and not the situation/time congress is in.

E stands out better than D
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 220 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 15:16
vdhawan1 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps


I would agree with your explanation if there were no "." after "applied in answer choice E.
The source of this SC is GMATTer.May be its a typo :(
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 277
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 15:37
goalsnr wrote:
vdhawan1 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps


I would agree with your explanation if there were no "." after "applied in answer choice E.
The source of this SC is GMATTer.May be its a typo :(


Lol yes...my eyes failed to notice the full stop. I registered it as a comma....he he....yea i guess it is a typo.....
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1829
Location: New York
Followers: 28

Kudos [?]: 498 [0], given: 5

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2008, 20:32
Because of "fullstop" I chose.. D.. If it is comma.. then will go for 'E'
_________________

Your attitude determines your altitude
Smiling wins more friends than frowning

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 220 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2008, 14:44
Folks,
I saw this SC in the OG. The "." in E is a typo.

OA is E
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 629
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 136 [0], given: 1

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2008, 17:13
"whereby" doesn't fit

"Under a provision Congress is required" sounds right whereas "under a provision whereby Congress is required" is very awkward.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 477
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 4

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 04 Jan 2009, 14:17
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Seems like the OA is E. My question is, why is past perfect preferred to simple past?
_________________

-Underline your question. It takes only a few seconds!
-Search before you post.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2010
Posts: 84
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 11

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 28 Apr 2011, 19:44
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?
VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1361
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 147 [0], given: 10

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 28 Apr 2011, 20:16
Between options D and E,whereby is unnecessary in option D.Hence E stands apart.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 282
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 23

Reviews Badge
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 09 May 2011, 23:58
prasforgmat wrote:
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?


I was also wandering for the same, here is what wiki has to say...

Use of whereby as a formal equivalent of where is nonstandard and is avoided by careful speakers and writers, who use where or in which instead. The term typically fails readability and comprehension review so it is generally avoided in published works. The term is also avoided by speakers as it makes it difficult to understand the message that is trying to be communicated.


After reading the the above & the way GMAC evaluate sentences use of whereby raises a red flag at first place!
_________________

My GMAT Journey 540->680->730!


~ When the going gets tough, the Tough gets going!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 261
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 20

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 31 Dec 2011, 02:40
yogesh1984 wrote:
prasforgmat wrote:
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?


I was also wandering for the same, here is what wiki has to say...

Use of whereby as a formal equivalent of where is nonstandard and is avoided by careful speakers and writers, who use where or in which instead. The term typically fails readability and comprehension review so it is generally avoided in published works. The term is also avoided by speakers as it makes it difficult to understand the message that is trying to be communicated.


After reading the the above & the way GMAC evaluate sentences use of whereby raises a red flag at first place!


When we use 'whereby' it means that sentence is not complete. The first part of the sentence already begins with 'Under' which again does not complete the sentence. Hence, we should not have 'whereby' in the second part. If we had something else after the second part or if the first part were able to complete the sentence, usage of 'whereby' would have correct, probably.
_________________

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 261
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 20

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 31 Dec 2011, 02:44
vscid wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Seems like the OA is E. My question is, why is past perfect preferred to simple past?


We use present perfect to refer to something that happened in the past but still relevant to present. Because the second part in all choices indicates the present tense, it implies that not-applicability-of-the-provision still holds good now and hence we need to use present perfect.
_________________

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

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Jan 2014
Posts: 148
Location: India
GMAT Date: 10-13-2014
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 119

GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 22 Sep 2014, 07:14
goalsnr wrote:
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

A. was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

B. was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

C. was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

D. has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

E. has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Why E is better than D?


Choce D is wrong because it does not have any independent clause. Whereby means "in which".
_________________

Consider +1 Kudos Please :)

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2014
Posts: 43
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 93

CAT Tests
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 21 Nov 2014, 05:13
Can anyone explain why "was never applied" is wrong in A , B & C?
_________________

Press KUDOs if you find my explanation helpful

Expert Post
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 565
Followers: 231

Kudos [?]: 374 [0], given: 5

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink] New post 21 Nov 2014, 12:23
Expert's post
TARGET730 wrote:
Can anyone explain why "was never applied" is wrong in A , B & C?



"was never applied" is wrong because it's an incorrect tense. Using the past tense implies that the provision can't be applied anymore because it or the constitution doesn't exist anymore. The provision still exists and the Constitution that still stands, so the provision could still be applied. We need to used the present perfect tense "has never been applied" to suggest a beginning in the past but effects that are still ongoing.

KW
_________________


Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile



Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never   [#permalink] 21 Nov 2014, 12:23
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 Experts publish their posts in the topic Q. Under a provision of the Constitution that was never RohitKalla 8 15 Aug 2011, 23:44
2 Experts publish their posts in the topic Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, shrive555 8 15 Oct 2010, 09:21
2 Under the provisions of the United States Constitution and ykaiim 16 05 Jun 2010, 07:13
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never prasannar 3 20 Feb 2008, 04:14
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never vc_pec 5 02 May 2007, 10:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

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®.