12 Days of Christmas GMAT Competition - Day 12: When the Focke Wulf 19

Experts' Global Official Explanation

Comparison + Pronouns + Meaning + Redundancy/Awkwardness

Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations had the capacity to rival the Focke Wulf 190 for speed and durability.

• The simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past.
• The simple past continuous tense is used to refer to actions that were ongoing over a period of time in the past.

A. Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase “could rival it for”, conveying the intended meaning- that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations had the capacity to rival the Focke Wulf 190 for speed and durability. Further, Option A correctly uses the simple past tense verb “could” to refer to an action that concluded in the past. Additionally, Option A is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

B. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “were the rivals of it…”; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that no planes manufactured by the Allied nations actively and literally rivalled the Focke Wulf 190 airplane; the intended meaning is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations had the capacity to rival the Focke Wulf 190 for speed and durability. Moreover, Option B further alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “their speed and durability”; the use of “their” illogically implies that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations could rival the Focke Wulf 190 airplane in the matter of the Allied planes’ speed and durability; the intended meaning is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations could rival the Focke Wulf 190 airplane for general speed and durability. Further, Option B uses the redundant phrase “in their speed and durability”, rendering it needlessly wordy.

C. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “were its rival…”; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that no planes manufactured by the Allied nations actively and literally rivalled the Focke Wulf 190 airplane; the intended meaning is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations had the capacity to rival the Focke Wulf 190 for speed and durability. Further, Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase “rival as to”, leading to awkwardness.

D. Trap. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “their speed and durability”; the use of “their” illogically implies that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations could rival the Focke Wulf 190 airplane in the matter of the Allied planes’ speed and durability; the intended meaning is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations could rival the Focke Wulf 190 airplane for general speed and durability. Further, Option D uses the redundant, passive voice construction “be its rival in their”, rendering it needlessly indirect and wordy.

E. Trap. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase “were rivaling its”; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that none of the fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations actively and literally undertook the action of rivalling the Focke Wulf 190 airplane for speed and durability; the intended meaning is that no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations had the capacity to rival the Focke Wulf 190 for speed and durability. Further, Option E incorrectly uses the simple past continuous tense verb “were rivalling” to refer to an action that concluded in the past; please remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past, and the simple past continuous tense is used to refer to actions that took place over a period of time in the past.

A is the best answer choice.
_________________

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for : "rival it for" shows correct meaning.
(B) were the rivals of it in their : were no planes....that were. Could usage corect here. acc to meaning. Out
(C) were its rival as to : were no planes....that were. Could usage corect here. acc to meaning. Out
(D) could be its rivals in their : wrong meaning. rivals in their speed and accuracy. Out.
(E) were rivaling its : Were wrong. Rivaling wrong usage. Out.

Ans: A

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.
(A) could rival it for
-preposition "for" is not required. incorrect use of "could"
(B) were the rivals of it in their
-rivals of it is redundant
(C) were its rival as to
-as to? eliminate
(D) could be its rivals in their
-concise and correct comparison made
(E) were rivaling its
-rivaling is wrong

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II,
there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations
that could rival it for speed and durability.


The use of rival it for is incorrect


its rival is better than rival of it
Incorrect


The use of rival as to is incorrect


When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could be its rivals in their speed and durability.
is a correct sentence


could be its rival is better than were rivalling its
Incorrect

IMO D
_________________

(A) could rival it for it usage is wrong
(B) were the rivals of it in their same as A
(C) were its rival as to as to , .. comparison or example meaning error
(D) could be its rivals in their meaning error
(E) were rivaling its
its usage is correct as it refers to Focke Wulf 190 airplane

OPTION E is correct

Past continuous tense is not required here. Hence, E is wrong.
In choice B, C and D, "rival" is used as a noun; whereas in choice A, "rival" is used as a verb.
When used as a noun, rival means enemy. When used as a verb, rival means compete/equal.
Per the meaning of this sentence, rival must be used as a verb. Hence, choices B, C and D are incorrect.

"rival for" is a correct idiom. Hence, answer is A.
_________________

Explanation:

The intended meaning of the sentence is that, During World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could match Focke Wulf 190 airplane for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for
Concisely conveys the intended meaning without any ambiguity. "It" clearly refers to Focke Wulf 190 airplane. KEEP IT.

(B) were the rivals of it in their
Wordy and awkward. Further, "in their" distorts the intended meaning of the sentence. OUT.

(C) were its rival as to
Use of "as to" is wrong here as it distorts the intended meaning of the sentence. OUT.

(D) could be its rivals in their
Same error as (A). OUT.

(E) were rivaling its
The sentence is in the past. Hence, rivaling is incorrect here. OUT.

ANSWER A.

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for - Correct
(B) were the rivals of it in their - Incorrect - wrong usage of their
(C) were its rival as to - Incorrect usage of "as to"
(D) could be its rivals in their - Incorrect - wrong usage of their
(E) were rivaling its - Incorrect - Usage of rivaling is wrong

Correct option is A"

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for Correct There were no fighter planes that could rival FW190 airplane for speed and durability; could rival here shows the competition between FW190 and other fighter planes of Allied nations

(B) were the rivals of it in their Incorrect as it changes the meaning of sentence by using the rival as noun; it says that there were no fighter planes that were rivals of FW190

(C) were its rival as to Incorrect as it changes the meaning of sentence by using the rival as noun; it says that there were no fighter planes that were rivals of FW190


(D) could be its rivals in their Incorrect as it changes the meaning of sentence by using the rival as noun; it says that there were no fighter planes that were rivals of FW190


(E) were rivaling its Incorrect as it says planes could rival speed of FW190 which is wrong to say.

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for
concise and direct..'it' refers to the Focke Wulf 190 airplane

(B) were the rivals of it in their
wordy structure..rivals of it vis-a-vis its rival

(C) were its rival as to
use of 'as to' based comparison is incorrect

(D) could be its rivals in their
redundant structure by adding 'in their'

(E) were rivaling its
probability not depicted through use of 'were'

Hence, (A) is the correct answer
_________________

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for - incorrect
(B) were the rivals of it in their - can't use in that way
(C) were its rival as to - "as to" is incorrect
(D) could be its rivals in their - Correct
(E) were rivaling its - using the incorrect tense

IMO D

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for---correct
(B) were the rivals of it in their-- incorrect tense, use of their is wrong
(C) were its rival as to--incorrect tense and idiom
(D) could be its rivals in their--wordy and use of their does not make sense since the traits are general not just theirs
(E) were rivaling its-- incorrect tense

Ans A

Ans D

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for
verb form --ideal for comparing actions

(B) were the rivals of it in their
long and unnecessarily wordy

(C) were its rival as to
'as to' comparison structure is inferior

(D) could be its rivals in their
long and unnecessarily wordy

(E) were rivaling its
present continuous tense..inappropriate

IMO, (A) is the correct choice

First distinction is between could and were.

In keeping with the tense of the question, were should be used. So, only B,C and E are left.

B- Weird construction but can't see any mistake. it refers to Focke Wolf 190 and there refers to the fighter planes.

C- rival as to is idiomatically incorrect.

E- Comparison error. Fighter planes are rivalling speed and durability is incorrect comparison. Hence, incorrect.

Hence, IMO B.

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for
correct meaning through a concise comparison-oriented structure using 'rival' as a verb

(B) were the rivals of it in their
sentence structure not concise

(C) were its rival as to
'as to' is weird for this context

(D) could be its rivals in their
sentence structure not concise

(E) were rivaling its
possibilty sentence structure lost by using were

(A) will be the correct choice

Answer is C
When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

(A) could rival it for could rival it is wrong
(B) were the rivals of it in their awkward
(C) were its rival as to clearly conveys the meaning. Correct
(D) could be its rivals in their in their is wrong
(E) were rivaling its illogical

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

Here "that" stands for planes.

(A) could rival it for -> No planes could rival FW190 for s&D -> Correct
(B) were the rivals of it in their -> No planes were the rivals of FW190 in their s&D ->"their" for FW190 is incorrect
(C) were its rival as to -> No Planes were FW190's rival as to s&D doesn't make sense.
(D) could be its rivals in their -> No Planes could be FW190's rivals in their s&D -> Rival is not the property of FE190.-> Incorrect
(E) were rivaling its -> "No Planes were rivaling FW190's s&d" doesn't make sense.

A) Looks fine. Keep.

B) were the rivals of it in their.. makes 0 sense. out.

C) There is no reason to use "as to". Out.

D) its has a huge meaning error. Its must refer to the Focke Wulf, and then the sentence would read: There were no airplanes manufactured by allied nations that could be Flocke Wulf's rivals in their speed and durability.

There is no indication of what they couldn't rival.

E) Meaning error - using were makes the whole thing after by a huge modifier.

Final answer A, it seems.

When the Focke Wulf 190 airplane first appeared in combat, during World War II, there were no fighter planes manufactured by the Allied nations that could rival it for speed and durability.

rival is used as verb in the original sentence. For simplicity to we can replace rival with 'match', which has the same meaning.
'Could' is past ability. Sentence is in the past, so could or were usage is fine.
We also note
No planes could match Focke Wulf airplanes. (in/for/on what?)
No planes could match FW airplanes. (Comparison is correct)
No planes could match FW airplanes in/for speed and durability.

So, No planes could rival FW airplanes in/for speed and durability.



(A) could rival it for
Sentence describe event in the past. So past ability, could, is fine. 'It' correctly refers to Focke Wulf airplane. With 'rival' usage as verb, Preposition 'for' is also fine and correctly make comparison of the airplanes' capabilities ( speed and durability). KEEP.

(B) were the rivals of it in their
the rivals here is used as noun, and causes redundancy.
Will you say,
X match Y
(or)
X is a match to Y in...?

The comparison is incomplete with their usage, as only other planes capabilities is considered and not the FW airplane. Also, 'their' pronoun is vague and may include all the planes, including FW airplanes. Eliminate.

(C) were its rival as to
'its rival' here is used as noun and has the same redundancy issue as in option B. 'AS' comparison is incomplete and we don't know how it compares the capabilities with FW airplane. Eliminate

(D) could be its rivals in their
Same issue as in option B and C. could be =were and causes redundancy, 'their' has pronoun vagueness/ reference problem and leads to incomplete comparison. Eliminate.

(E) were rivaling its
Same Redundancy issue exist as in option B,C and D.
Will you say,
No planes were matching its(FW airplane) capabilities
No planes could match FW airplane in capabilities?
Eliminate.

So the best answer choice is A