Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 00:00

### 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

# A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 103
Location: san jose , CA
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 88 [5] , given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2004, 00:51
5
KUDOS
71
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

Last edited by Skywalker18 on 28 Feb 2017, 22:01, edited 1 time in total.
Corrected the underlined portion
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 267
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 20

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2012, 08:43
Intern
Joined: 21 Apr 2012
Posts: 9
GRE 1: 1140 Q670 V370
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 7

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2012, 06:08
Correct answew should be D IMO and here is why

A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
_________________

Difficult things take a long time. impossible things take a little longer

Thanks for reading my post Kudos to me if you like my response:)

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2022
Followers: 2220

Kudos [?]: 7766 [0], given: 291

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2012, 07:20
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi All,
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphate that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

The intended meaning of the sentence is that till 1972, municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount of phosphate into the Great Lakes. However, a 1972 agreement between Canada and the US reduced this amount.

The only error in this sentence is the use of past perfect tense “had been allowed”. Let us understand how. Per the sentence, the agreement reduced the amount that municipalities were allowed to dump. Now in this sentence, the verb tense - past perfect tense - had been allowed - is incorrect because it non-sensically implies that municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount sometime in the past - (they are no longer allowed to dump now, since the action is already completed) and then the next event in the past happened - the agreement reduced this amount. It is not possible to reduce an amount for something that has already happened (had been allowed).

Process of Elimination

Choice A: Incorrect for the reason discussed above.

Choice B: reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping. Incorrect. Per this choice the agreement itself did the action of "reduce". This cannot be true because the agreement cannot reduce the amount of phosphates dumped by municipalities. The agreement can only provide limits for this amount. The municipalities have to then take appropriate actions to reduce their emissions to meet the new allowable limits. Removal of “allow” distorts the meaning of the sentence. Also, this choice has the same verb tense issue as in choice A.

Choice C: reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump. Incorrect. Since agreement took place in 1972, use of present tense “reduces” is incorrect. Also, this sentence states a general fact about the amount of phosphate the municipalities are allowed to dump. This must be stated in the simple present tense. Use of present perfect tense “have been allowed” to state a general fact is not correct.

Choice D: reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump. Correct. This choice conveys the intended meaning. In general, the municipalities are allowed to dump a certain amount of phosphate. However, an agreement between Canada and the US reduced that amount in 1972.

Choice E: reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities. Incorrect. This choice has the same verb tense error as in choice C. Use of “for” after “allowed” is unidiomatic.

1. Understand the intended meaning of the sentence.
2. Past perfect tense denotes that the action is already over.
3. Be careful of the choices that remove certain words present in the original choice. Such removals may change the meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Manager
Joined: 22 Apr 2011
Posts: 213
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 18

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2012, 03:30
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
Hey guys,

Interesting debate - with verb tense errors I firmly believe that logic plays a huge role in your ability to make tough decisions. When looking at the choices, ask yourself "is it possible the events happened in this order?".

Here, is it possible that this law reduced "the amount that municipalities (PREVIOUSLY) had been able to dump"? Remember, "had been" means "before the past-tense event". A law can't retroactively change something like an amount - whatever these cities dumped is already dumped. so "had been" logically doesn't make sense for any of these.

The fact that we're anchored in 1972 at the beginning of the sentence means that we're stuck with the past-tense "reduced" and not "reduces", so that narrows us down to D, the only choice that sets a logical timeline for these events.

thanks Brian i have some doubt about A and D but your analysis has cleared all my doubt
_________________

some people are successful, because they have been fortunate enough and some people earn success, because they have been determined.....

please press kudos if you like my post.... i am begging for kudos...lol

Director
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 530
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 562

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Nov 2012, 03:38
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA = D

I believe D should have been 'were' allowed to dump

This is 2012.. muncipalities have been dumping since years immemorial. .
in 1972, an agreement was passed that reduced something back then... not now. .

Am I correct?

and Please also let us know the right usage of 'had been' with some examples. .
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2012
Posts: 95
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
WE: Other (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 35

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2012, 03:04
Sachin9 wrote:
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA = D

I believe D should have been 'were' allowed to dump

This is 2012.. muncipalities have been dumping since years immemorial. .
in 1972, an agreement was passed that reduced something back then... not now. .

Am I correct?

and Please also let us know the right usage of 'had been' with some examples. .

Sachin,

'are' allowed to dump is correct because the 1972-agreement is still in effect. Hence, 'were' changes the meaning and is wrong. Though it is 2012, municipalities are still not allowed to dump more than x amount of phosphates because of the agreement.

Does this make sense?

For your second question, 'had been' refers to a time (A) in the past before another time (B) in the past such that A is before B. Take a look at this example:

..................A.......................................B......... ----> Timeline

Both the events 'reading' and 'arrived' are past. More importantly, considering the timeline, A happened before B. The event that is more in the past gets the 'had been' prefixed to it. Thus, 'had been reading'.

Hope this is clear.
_________________

TH

Give me +1 Kudos if my post helped!

Intern
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 04:54
Hi everyone,

How can "the amount of phosphates" be correct?

"Phosphates" is a plural count noun. Thus, we can not use "the amount" here!

Could someone help me explain? Thanks in advance!
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2022
Followers: 2220

Kudos [?]: 7766 [0], given: 291

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2012, 17:06
Hi tinyturtle,

Per the context of the sentence, we know that the municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount of phosphate in the Great Lakes. This was a fixed amount, say 200 pounds per month. This is a specific amount. Hence, use of singular “amount” is absolutely correct here.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 17

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2012, 01:22
I also did not understand the usage of the amount of since it is phosphateS
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 232
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 328 [1] , given: 121

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2012, 06:54
1
KUDOS
crejoc wrote:
noboru wrote:
Erukumk wrote:
+1 for D wats the OA

It is A, but i am with D too (At least until somebody clarify this...)

Probably, you must have referred it from 1000sc, only in 1000sc it is A, but the same problem is in OG 11 th edition. where OA is D, 1000sc has many questions with wrong OA.

Economist wrote:
Is the OA geniune:)
Because I cant understand how A can be the answer, there is absolutely no need of "had been allowed to dump"..as there is only one action in the past.

OA is D

IT IS A PROBLEM FORM OG 11 , PROBLEM NO.62 REFER IT.

Thanks for the clarification. I also thought that it is A.
_________________

Kudos if you like the post!

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1083
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 566 [0], given: 70

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2012, 09:01
egmat wrote:
Hi All

the verb tense - past perfect tense - had been allowed - is incorrect because it non-sensically implies that municipalities were allowed to dump a certain amount sometime in the past - (they are no longer allowed to dump now, since the action is already completed) and then the next event in the past happened - the agreement reduced this amount. It is not possible to reduce an amount for something that has already happened (had been allowed).

I am confused when you say both A and B has the same tense error i.e. the job is no more done...

I advised him because I had done the job in the past.<<<It means i am not doing that job>>>
I advised him because I had been doing it.<<<It means i am doing the job>>> or <<<I am no more doing the job>>>

Also what is the difference between "reduced the amount of phosphate" and "reduced the phosphate amount.."

Can we blindly infer that with which ever action "had" is used that will mean that action itself is over.......

Thanks
Archit
Intern
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2012, 00:10

I got 2 sentences from http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gramm ... -vs-fewer/

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

I learned a rule that "Amount" is used for un-countable noun. I donn't understand the first sentence. Could you help explain?

Thanks,
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2022
Followers: 2220

Kudos [?]: 7766 [0], given: 291

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2012, 07:05
tinyturtle wrote:

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

I learned a rule that "Amount" is used for un-countable noun. I donn't understand the first sentence. Could you help explain?

Thanks,

Hi tinyturtle,

Yes, we do use "amount" for uncountable noun. And this rule is in play the first sentence.

1. This amount of mashed potatoes should be enough for dinner.

Mashed potatoes can not be counted because they are crushed and mashed after being boiled. Hence, it is not possible to count them.

2. This number of baked potatoes should be enough for dinner.

However, when a potato is baked, it still remains in its shape and can be counted. Hence, this sentence is correct.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2012, 05:26
Thank you so much Shraddha. I got it now.
Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 76
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Dec 2012, 10:03
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 76
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Dec 2012, 10:04
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 76
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 14

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Dec 2012, 10:05
A – No necessity to change the tense. Eliminate.
B – Amount of phosphate is better than phosphate amount. Eliminate
C – Same as B
D – Same tense. Keep
E – “that are” allowed for dumping is better. Plus its passive. Eliminate
Manager
Status: Tougher times ...
Joined: 04 Nov 2012
Posts: 51
Location: India
GMAT 1: 480 Q32 V25
WE: General Management (Manufacturing)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 30 [2] , given: 44

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2013, 08:50
2
KUDOS
1. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

The correct answer is A. Why not B or D ?
_________________

Kabilan.K
Kudos is a boost to participate actively and contribute more to the forum

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3182
Followers: 861

Kudos [?]: 7331 [0], given: 1065

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2013, 13:49
Hi

first of all the part of the sentence must be always underlined. Thanks

Secondly: 1000 series is not a good resource to study at all.

B is wron because the right verbe tense is had been allowed to dump not dumping

D is wrong because it seems to suggest that the permission to municipalities is given by itself and not by an agreement. The verb must point out to the real subject of the sentece: the agreement NOT municipalities

regards
_________________
Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 133
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 3

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2013, 18:28
i strongly feel that D sud be the answer . in fact A is wrong !!
A gives a nonsensical meaning that the agreement of 1972 reduced some thing that these countries had dumped in the past !! u can reduce the amount of something that these countries are dumping at the moment and not of something that they had dumped

Quote:
carcass wrote:D is wrong because it seems to suggest that the permission to municipalities is given by itself and not by an agreement. The verb must point out to the real subject of the sentece: the agreement NOT municipalities

no where it is suggesting such a meaning !! in fact all that D means is that some agreement reduced the amount of some blah blah thing that these municipalities are allowed to dump
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce   [#permalink] 16 Mar 2013, 18:28

Go to page   Previous    1  ...  11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20  ...  22    Next  [ 428 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 0 19 Mar 2013, 00:05
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 0 30 Dec 2012, 10:04
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 0 03 Jun 2012, 03:30
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 0 30 Dec 2012, 10:03
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 0 30 Dec 2012, 10:05
Display posts from previous: Sort by