Wine has been among the most popular export goods from California for the past ten years. Americans have been consuming more wine from California each year than in the previous year. Yet, over these same ten years the lack of rainfall in California has been such that the soil has not been fertile enough to grow a significant crop of wine-producing grapes.
Which one of the following, if true, best reconciles the discrepancy above?
(A) Over the past ten years people have been consuming more vintage wines than before.
(B) Publicized efforts to curb drunk driving have contributed to the trend to consume less wine.
(C) Irrigation attempts in California were unsuccessful.
(D) The price of California wine has dropped considerably over the past ten years.
(E) Due to new fermentation processes grapes that were once deemed unusable are now suitable for winemaking.
I am confused between A and E. How can we eliminate E?
Mike, Can you please provide an explanation for the CR question below. Thank you very much
Dear TirthankarP & krakgmat,
I'm happy to help.
Frankly, I don't think this is a very high quality question --- I think it has a number of flaws.
First of all, here's a book review you may find germane:http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/princeton- ... ok-review/
I don't like that the question uses the idea of "vintage
" wines, and assumes that test-takers the world over will recognize that this means: wines older than 10 years. The word "vintage
" is a relative obscure work, and the connotations it has for wine are unique ---- I don't know that use of the word would be appreciated by folks from other countries, especially folks in places in which wine is not frequently consumed. BTW, this is also contrary to real-world fact: California wines are meant to be consumed young --- nobody drinks vintage CA wines. Obvious, this real world fact doesn't impact how we approach the CR question, but the GMAT itself, and good GMAT prep sources, strive to make all the CR arguments accord with real-world fact & instincts.
I suppose in the question-maker's mind, the argument says, "the lack of rainfall in California has been such that the soil has not been fertile enough to grow a significant crop of wine-producing grapes
." I suppose the question-maker expect us to realize that these "wine-producing grapes
" that are in short supply include the ones "once deemed unusable
[that] are now suitable for winemaking
." I must say, in my mind, it's quite unclear whether this new population of grapes, the previous unsuitable ones, are included in the statement about the drop in production. In other words, I could see how one might make an argument for eliminating (E)
, but I don't find it particularly compelling. In a well-written GMAT CR question, one answer is unambiguously right, and the other four, though perhaps tempting at first, can each be eliminated on clear and unambiguously grounds. I found the grounds under which one might eliminate (E)
quite ambiguous, and therefore, I don't find this a particularly strong question.
Here's, for free, is a much stronger CR question:http://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/3129
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Magoosh Test Prep