NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 12:55 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 12:55
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
G
aghosh54
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 May 2017
Posts: 158
Own Kudos [?]: 82 [10]
Given Kudos: 20
Location: India
Schools: McDonough '22 (M$)
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V39
WE:General Management (Retail Banking)
Send PM
Reviews Badge
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   12 Sep 2018, 10:22
1
Kudos
9
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (01:09) correct 49% (01:21) wrong based on 409 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling in a residential neighborhood.


(A) increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling

(B) increased the number of people who are allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling

(C) increases the number of people who have been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling

(D) increased the number of people who had been occupying a single-family dwelling

(E) increases the number of people allowed foroccupation in a single-family dwelling
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
B
User avatar
P
sudarshan22
Retired Moderator
Joined: 30 Jan 2015
Posts: 636
Own Kudos [?]: 2427 [4]
Given Kudos: 1131
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GPA: 3.5
Send PM
Re: A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   12 Sep 2018, 11:15
3
Kudos
+1 for B.

(A) increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling --> Incorrect usage of past perfect tense

(B) increased the number of people who are allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling --> Correct, rectifies Verb-Tense error and conveys intended meaning

(C) increases the number of people who have been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling --> Verb-Tense error

(D) increased the number of people who had been occupying a single-family dwelling --> Incorrect usage of past perfect tense

(E) increases the number of people allowed foroccupation in a single-family dwelling --> Verb-Tense error

Hence, B.
avatar
B
jayashree1412
Intern
Intern
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]
Given Kudos: 16
Send PM
Re: A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   13 Sep 2018, 06:54
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling in a residential neighborhood.

The sentence is about an event in past, So option B "who are allowed to occupy", the use of present tense in the sentence is unclear.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
L
rohit8865
Director
Director
Joined: 05 Mar 2015
Posts: 852
Own Kudos [?]: 861 [0]
Given Kudos: 45
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   29 Oct 2018, 12:17
jayashree1412 wrote:
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling in a residential neighborhood.

The sentence is about an event in past, So option B "who are allowed to occupy", the use of present tense in the sentence is unclear.

Posted from my mobile device



jayashree1412

ordinance was indeed passed in past..but what its effect is presently also true and is being followed.

So use of present tense is perfect here.
User avatar
L
globaldesi
VP
VP
Joined: 28 Jul 2016
Posts: 1212
Own Kudos [?]: 1728 [0]
Given Kudos: 67
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Human Resources
Schools: ISB '18 (D)
GPA: 3.97
WE:Project Management (Investment Banking)
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   29 Oct 2018, 20:21
jayashree1412 wrote:
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling in a residential neighborhood.

The sentence is about an event in past, So option B "who are allowed to occupy", the use of present tense in the sentence is unclear.

Posted from my mobile device

The intended meaning is that the number of people has increased. the did no increase in the past. Hence "are" is the correct usage.
avatar
G
jaisonsunny77
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2019
Posts: 474
Own Kudos [?]: 342 [0]
Given Kudos: 28
Send PM
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink] New post   15 Jun 2020, 22:40
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling in a residential neighborhood.

(A) increased the number of people who had been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling - ''had been allowed'' implies that at some point in the past, this fact ceased to exist. This is not the intended meaning of the passage; the passage intends to discuss about something that occurred in the past and whose effect/presence is still felt today.

(B) increased the number of people who are allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling - has no error. Hence, (B) is the right answer choice.

(C) increases the number of people who have been allowed to occupy a single-family dwelling - since the effect of ''increase'' took place in the past, we need to use the past tense.

(D) increased the number of people who had been occupying a single-family dwelling - has the same error as described in (B).

(E) increases the number of people allowed foroccupation in a single-family dwelling - to ''allow for'' means ''to accommodate''. Hence, (E) introduces the following structure: "....increase the number of people to accommodate occupation''. it does not make any sense to ''accommodate occupation''.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
A 1964 ordinance in the city of Pittsburgh increased the number of peo [#permalink]
15 Jun 2020, 22:40
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6923 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions