It is currently 24 Jun 2017, 07:30

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

5 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 103
Location: san jose , CA
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Sep 2004, 00:51
5
This post received
KUDOS
74
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
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Apr 2011
Posts: 212
Schools: Mccombs business school, Mays business school, Rotman Business School,
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Director
avatar
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 520
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2012
Posts: 95
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
WE: Other (Computer Software)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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:

Harry had been reading a book before his friend arrived.
..................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!

"Follow your passion. Change the world."

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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!
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
B
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2096
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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.
Shraddha
_________________












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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Posts: 22
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Dec 2012, 01:22
I also did not understand the usage of the amount of since it is phosphateS
VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1082
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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).


Hi shradha
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
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Dec 2012, 00:10
Hi Shraddha,

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,
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
B
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2096
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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.
Shraddha
_________________












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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Dec 2012, 05:26
Thank you so much Shraddha. I got it now. :)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 74
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 74
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 74
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3211
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
_________________

COLLECTION OF QUESTIONS AND RESOURCES
Quant: 1. ALL GMATPrep questions Quant/Verbal 2. Bunuel Signature Collection - The Next Generation 3. Bunuel Signature Collection ALL-IN-ONE WITH SOLUTIONS 4. Veritas Prep Blog PDF Version 5. MGMAT Study Hall Thursdays with Ron Quant Videos
Verbal:1. Verbal question bank and directories by Carcass 2. MGMAT Study Hall Thursdays with Ron Verbal Videos 3. Critical Reasoning_Oldy but goldy question banks 4. Sentence Correction_Oldy but goldy question banks 5. Reading-comprehension_Oldy but goldy question banks

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 133
Premium Member
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Tougher times ...
Joined: 04 Nov 2012
Posts: 51
Location: India
GMAT 1: 480 Q32 V25
WE: General Management (Manufacturing)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Mar 2013, 06:38
kabilank87 wrote:
neha24 wrote:
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


In "D" can we use the present tense " are " ? Since the entire argument is in past, why can't we use "were" , instead of "are".


in your explanation of "A", since there are 2 actions happened in the past ( the agreement reduced ... and the countries dumped ), and the action dumped occurs earlier , what's wrong in using " past perfect - had dumped " ? - It is according to the definition of usage of past perfect in manhattan SC.

Similarly in "B" .. the background event is " countries dumping " and the interrupting foreground event is " the agreement reducing what the countries dumping " .. i feel this is also correct according to the usage of past progressive in manhattan SC.

Will you please clarify ..?
_________________

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.04
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Mar 2013, 08:59
kabilank87 wrote:
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 ?


IMO, D is the answer.
A used past perfect "had been". This is not needed as no 2 past events are chronologically arranged. Likewise, the usage of past perfect continuous is also not needed in option B.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 23
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.04
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2013, 20:04
kabilank87 wrote:
anandrajakrishnan wrote:
kabilank87 wrote:
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 ?


IMO, D is the answer.
A used past perfect "had been". This is not needed as no 2 past events are chronologically arranged. Likewise, the usage of past perfect continuous is also not needed in option B.


Hi anandrajakrishnan / Neha

In " A " i see the 2 events are chronologically arranged .

By assuming we are in 1972 when the agreement have just passed, we would have told that " The countries have been dumping it for some years blah blanh blah .. and the agreement reduced that( Dumping). The " dumping" started in the past and continues till the agreement came into effect and reduced it. Since it involves 2 different time complex time periods. So i think past perfect / perfect continuous should be used here. But i am not certain about it.


There is a subtle difference in meaning here. Option A changes the meaning to "the agreement reduced the amount of phosphates that munipality has dumped so far". How can the agreement reduce the amount of already dumped phosphate?
Option D gives the meaning outright that "the amount of phosphates that the municipalities were allowed to dump is reduced after the agreement"
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Posts: 74
Location: India
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2013, 00:05
kabilank87 wrote:
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 ?



anandrajakrishnan,

You are right - How can the agreement reduce the amount of already dumped phosphate?
But the agreement can put a restriction on the amount of phosphate to be dumped.

Moreover, D changes the tense flow of the sentence by the usage of 'are'.
Hope this clarifies.

Regds
Sony
_________________

A bend in the road is not the end of the road unless you fail to take a turn.....

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 430
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2013, 00:26
All duplicate threads on this topic have been merged.

Please read and follow the Guidelines for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum before posting anything.
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce   [#permalink] 08 May 2013, 00:26

Go to page   Previous    1  ...  11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22    Next  [ 428 posts ] 

    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The border between the United States and Canada rohan2345 3 10 May 2017, 02:58
2 Experts publish their posts in the topic Arms talks from Geneva between China, the United States souvik101990 2 20 Jan 2015, 11:07
7 In 1994 agreements existed between Canada and several getgyan 14 03 Jun 2017, 08:47
2 There is a widespread belief in the United States and ... DenisSh 11 18 Feb 2015, 09:05
SC- Companies in the United State sandipchowdhury 9 11 Jun 2012, 03:35
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| 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®.