It is currently 22 Sep 2017, 10:31

### 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: 104

Kudos [?]: 110 [7], given: 0

Location: san jose , CA

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2004, 00:51
7
KUDOS
90
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Edit: The discussion is locked. Go HERE for further discussion.

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 broall on 30 Aug 2017, 18:37, edited 3 times in total.
Too many pages for this topic. Do not try to unlock this post again!

Kudos [?]: 110 [7], given: 0

Senior Manager
Status: Active
Affiliations: NA
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 325

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 56

GMAT 1: 590 Q50 V21
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.5
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2014, 08:02
1
KUDOS
The Correct ans. is 'D'

Eliminate B and C because incorrect 'the phosphate amount' is used here.It should be 'the amount of phosphates'.

Eliminate 'E' --- context talks about a 1972 event ,hence 'reduced' should be the verb.

between A and D

had been allowed(past perfect) vs are allowed (past)

As we the sentence talks about a 1972 agreement ,it will reduce the amount ,which is allowed to be dumped at that point of time not before that ,therefore past tense is required not past perfect.
If we use past perfect ,it would mean that the amount was allowed only before the agreement has been made.If the amount has already been reduced ,then what is the use of the agreement afterwards.

Don't forget to press Kudos
_________________

#If you like my post , please encourage me by giving Kudos

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 56

Intern
Joined: 30 Dec 2014
Posts: 3

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

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

### Show Tags

10 Jan 2015, 23:41
i think this is a poorly formed question. both A and D are grammatically correct and would make sense.

i disagree that A is wrong. the explanations given for this view are all unsatisfactory as well. it could easily be interpreted grammatically that the agreement in question reduced the amount of phosphates that the municipalities were allowed to dump after the agreement itself. it makes perfect sense. ie. before 1972, 100 units allowed. after 1972 agreement, 50 units allowed. this is what option A would imply. the municipalities had been allowed to dump 100 units before, and the agreement reduced this amount to 50.

D would make sense as well for the explanations provided above. all in all, a poor question. i hope questions like this do not come out in the exam.

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

Chat Moderator
Joined: 19 Apr 2013
Posts: 694

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Concentration: Strategy, Healthcare
Schools: Sloan '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V41
GPA: 4
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2015, 00:28
Remained between A and D. Still can't understand why A is wrong.
_________________

If my post was helpful, press Kudos. If not, then just press Kudos !!!

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2014
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 125

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

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2015, 23:11
What is the correct answer for the question , I opted for an " A" , D seems quite irrelevant .." Are " doesnt match with the past tense reduced

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 125

Chat Moderator
Joined: 19 Apr 2013
Posts: 694

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Concentration: Strategy, Healthcare
Schools: Sloan '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V41
GPA: 4
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2015, 00:48
dhyani wrote:
What is the correct answer for the question , I opted for an " A" , D seems quite irrelevant .." Are " doesnt match with the past tense reduced

The correct answer for this question is D.
_________________

If my post was helpful, press Kudos. If not, then just press Kudos !!!

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Director
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 735

Kudos [?]: 299 [0], given: 11

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

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2015, 03:08
Ergenekon wrote:
Remained between A and D. Still can't understand why A is wrong.

Hello Ergenekon, I provided a detailed explanation to this some time back here.

Do let me know if something is still not clear.
_________________

Thanks,
Ashish (GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle)
http://www.EducationAisle.com

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at Amazon.in and Flipkart

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi.com

Kudos [?]: 299 [0], given: 11

Chat Moderator
Joined: 19 Apr 2013
Posts: 694

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Concentration: Strategy, Healthcare
Schools: Sloan '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V41
GPA: 4
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2015, 03:11
Thanks EducationAisle. I have read almost all explanations to this question through different sites, and in the end, I decided to remember it as it is. Because I think the answer to this question will always be ambiguous to non - native speakers:)
_________________

If my post was helpful, press Kudos. If not, then just press Kudos !!!

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 537

Director
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 735

Kudos [?]: 299 [1], given: 11

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

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2015, 03:49
1
KUDOS
Ergenekon wrote:
I think the answer to this question will always be ambiguous to non - native speakers:)

Hi Ergenekon, I don't take that for an answer, because I am a non-native speaker too:).

Let's give it another shot, with a fresh example, that you can better associate with.

Prior to 2012, GMAT used to have two essays as part of AWA. In 2012 however, GMAC introduced the IR section, replacing one of the AWA essays. So:

i) Prior to 2012, GMAT had two essays as part of AWA
ii) Since 2012, GMAT has had one essay as part of AWA.

How would we articulate this in a sentence?

A 2012 change in the pattern of GMAT reduced the number of essays that students are asked to attempt as part of the GMAT exam.

Now, why can’t we articulate the sentence as:

A 2012 change in the pattern of GMAT reduced the number of essays that students had been asked to attempt as part of the GMAT exam.

For this, let’s understand the intent of the sentence. Students are asked to attempt what as part of the GMAT exam? Well, students are asked to attempt essays as part of the GMAT exam. So, that (in that students…) is clearly referring to essays (and not to number of essays).

Summarily, students attempted essays even prior to 2012; students attempt essays even now (and hence the construct: students are asked to attempt, because students are asked to attempt essays even now). The only thing that changed/reduced in 2012 was their number. Hence, the sentence:

GMAT reduced the number of essays that students are asked to attempt as part of the GMAT exam.

Let me know if it is now making some sense:).
_________________

Thanks,
Ashish (GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle)
http://www.EducationAisle.com

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at Amazon.in and Flipkart

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi.com

Kudos [?]: 299 [1], given: 11

VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1412

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 916

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

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2015, 03:16
rahul 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

look at choice E.
"reduces" is CORRECT because 1972 agreement can do something at present. So, "allowed for dumping" is wrong
why is this phrase wrong?

pls help.
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 916

Intern
Joined: 02 Mar 2015
Posts: 12

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

Location: Brazil
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GPA: 3.51
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Feb 2016, 14:32
rahul 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

I think (D) is better than (A).

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

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3096 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Feb 2016, 15:38
dlugli wrote:
rahul 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

I think (D) is better than (A).

Hi dlugli,

Let me try to answer your query. Yes I do agree with you that D is better than A, and indeed D is the official answer.

The dumping activity (rather allowing the dumping activity) continued after the agreement, therefore the past perfect had been is definitely wrong. Using had been would imply that the dumping activity occurred before the agreement took place and did not occur after the agreement.

Let us now consider 2 possible correct options: simple past were allowed to dump and simple present are allowed to dump.

Both could be correct depending on the intended meaning. If the dumping activity ( rather allowing the dumping activity) does not continue now, then were allowed would be correct. However if the dumping activity ( rather allowing the dumping activity) still continues in the present day, then are allowed would be correct. The option were allowed does appear in any of the answer choices and hence this ambiguity does not arise at all. In absence of were allowed, are allowed is clearly the winner.

Does this explanation help?

Kudos [?]: 3096 [0], given: 22

Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Aug 2015
Posts: 396

Kudos [?]: 317 [0], given: 10

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V44
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2016, 20:52
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.

There are two actions and they are not dependent and hence past perfect tense need not be used and secondly, the two clauses are joined as a subordinate clauses "using that". Check out the question : galileo-did-not-invent-the-telescope-but-on-hearing-in-111155.html. Where the past perfect is used properly.

(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
Because of the above reason, this option is incorrect

(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
There is no need to use Past perfect continuous because the events are not dependent and the event need not be continuous.

(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
Simple present is completely wrong as this event occurred in the past

(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
Correct

(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities
Simple present is completely wrong as this event occurred in the past
_________________

Reach out to us at bondwithus@gmatify.com

Kudos [?]: 317 [0], given: 10

Intern
Joined: 09 Dec 2014
Posts: 35

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 79

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

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2016, 00:30
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 -- Had is not required as the sentence is telling a fact
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping -- amount of phosphate is preffered than phosphate amount
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump -- amount of phosphate is preffered than phosphate amount
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump -- correct answer
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities[/quote] -- "allowed for dumping by municipalities" is wordy and is in passive voice

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 79

Intern
Joined: 08 Aug 2015
Posts: 1

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

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

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2016, 11:29
egmat wrote:
nelz007 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.

I wasn't fully convinced with the OA it was between A and D for me. When I pre-thought an answer choice I thought of the "were allowed" but that wasn't there in any of the answer choice.

Hi Nelson,
Let me address your doubt by first understanding the intended meaning of the sentence and analyzing the sentence structure. Then it will be easier to understand the differences between the options. (A and D in this case)
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. Now let us analyze the sentence structure.

• A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates
o that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

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).

Therefore Choice A is incorrect for the reason discussed above.

Choice D: reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump.
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.
Therefore this option is correct.

The thing to note here is that both "were" and "are" can be correct. So, if any one of these is given in the option statements, we can mark that option statement.

Now, the question is: what difference does it make to use "are" over "were"?

The school reduced the fine that Joe was supposed to pay.
The school reduced the fine that Joe is supposed to pay.

Can you identify the difference between these two sentences?

In the first sentence, Joe "was" supposed to pay the fine sometime in the past and we do not know whether he has paid the fine till now or not.
In the second sentence, Joe "is" supposed to pay the fine presently and we know that he has not yet paid the fine.

Similar is the case with the use of "were" and "are" in the original sentence.

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the US reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities were allowed to dump into the Great Lakes

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the US reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump into the Great Lakes

The first sentence means that we are referring to amount of phosphates that municipalities were allowed to dump in the past whereas the second sentence means that we are referring to the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump currently.

Do you get the difference?

So, both "are" and "were" are grammatically correct but convey different meanings.

Hope this helps!

Regards,
Krishna

Before Rocky came, I completed my homework.
Before Rocky came, I had completed my homework.

Can you please tell which one is correct in gmat.

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

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3096 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2016, 12:04
koulr wrote:
egmat wrote:
nelz007 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.

I wasn't fully convinced with the OA it was between A and D for me. When I pre-thought an answer choice I thought of the "were allowed" but that wasn't there in any of the answer choice.

Hi Nelson,
Let me address your doubt by first understanding the intended meaning of the sentence and analyzing the sentence structure. Then it will be easier to understand the differences between the options. (A and D in this case)
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. Now let us analyze the sentence structure.

• A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates
o that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.

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).

Therefore Choice A is incorrect for the reason discussed above.

Choice D: reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump.
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.
Therefore this option is correct.

The thing to note here is that both "were" and "are" can be correct. So, if any one of these is given in the option statements, we can mark that option statement.

Now, the question is: what difference does it make to use "are" over "were"?

The school reduced the fine that Joe was supposed to pay.
The school reduced the fine that Joe is supposed to pay.

Can you identify the difference between these two sentences?

In the first sentence, Joe "was" supposed to pay the fine sometime in the past and we do not know whether he has paid the fine till now or not.
In the second sentence, Joe "is" supposed to pay the fine presently and we know that he has not yet paid the fine.

Similar is the case with the use of "were" and "are" in the original sentence.

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the US reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities were allowed to dump into the Great Lakes

A 1972 agreement between Canada and the US reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump into the Great Lakes

The first sentence means that we are referring to amount of phosphates that municipalities were allowed to dump in the past whereas the second sentence means that we are referring to the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump currently.

Do you get the difference?

So, both "are" and "were" are grammatically correct but convey different meanings.

Hope this helps!

Regards,
Krishna

Before Rocky came, I completed my homework.
Before Rocky came, I had completed my homework.

Can you please tell which one is correct in gmat.

Before Rocky came, I completed my homework.: correct - use of "before" makes the use of past perfect unnecessary ( for two distinct events that started and completed in the past).

Before Rocky came, I had completed my homework: wrong - the correct statement would be: When Rocky came, I had completed my homework.

Kudos [?]: 3096 [0], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2016
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 15

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2016, 07:17
My Approach to solve this question :

1. For the split for reduce, past tense (reduced) is correct, hence eliminate C & E
2. In A, B and D, for the split dump : had been dumping is the wrong verb tense hence eliminate B
3. Now in A and D, a simple past tense for verb dump is preferred, hence eliminate A
4. Read D with the complete sentence, sounds ok

Total time taken to solve : 85 seconds

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 15

Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2013
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 11

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

### Show Tags

27 Feb 2017, 19:48
I am unable to understand the usage of 'are' in option D. When the agreement took place in the past then the usage of 'are' in a bit difficult to understand. Please advice.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 11

Manager
Joined: 31 Dec 2015
Posts: 59

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 262

Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q44 V38
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V39
GPA: 3.9
Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Feb 2017, 21:18
Since there seems to be some disagreement on OA, request experts to help.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 262

Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 1088

Kudos [?]: 1124 [2], given: 29

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

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2017, 00:47
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
There's no doubt about the OA: it is definitely D, and there is nothing wrong with this question (which really is an official GMAT question).

People get confused by this one because of the shifts in time. An agreement that took place in the past (described correctly in the past tense) had an effect on what we are now allowed to do (described correctly in the present tense). Similarly, I could say that a movie made in 1950 "changed the way that we see romantic love" or that a change made to the tax code in 1985 "limits the amount of losses one is able to deduct."

A is absolutely wrong. There's no ambiguity about that either. It starts in past tense and shifts to past perfect. This implies that the law worked backwards in time , changing the amount that people had been allowed to dump before the law was passed! Can we all agree that that makes no sense? Remember that the past perfect ("had been") is only used to describe events that precede some other past event in the sentence (or--outside the GMAT--elsewhere in the text). Answer choice A has only one past event, so the absurd interpretation I've provided is actually the only possible meaning! That choice has to go.
_________________

Dmitry Farber | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | New York

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile |
Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 1124 [2], given: 29

Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2013
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 11

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

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2017, 01:32
DmitryFarber wrote:
There's no doubt about the OA: it is definitely D, and there is nothing wrong with this question (which really is an official GMAT question).

People get confused by this one because of the shifts in time. An agreement that took place in the past (described correctly in the past tense) had an effect on what we are now allowed to do (described correctly in the present tense). Similarly, I could say that a movie made in 1950 "changed the way that we see romantic love" or that a change made to the tax code in 1985 "limits the amount of losses one is able to deduct."

A is absolutely wrong. There's no ambiguity about that either. It starts in past tense and shifts to past perfect. This implies that the law worked backwards in time , changing the amount that people had been allowed to dump before the law was passed! Can we all agree that that makes no sense? Remember that the past perfect ("had been") is only used to describe events that precede some other past event in the sentence (or--outside the GMAT--elsewhere in the text). Answer choice A has only one past event, so the absurd interpretation I've provided is actually the only possible meaning! That choice has to go.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. The action stopped after the agreement was passed. In that case if we mention that it could have continued till present times, which is not the case.

So I am still confused why 'are' is used. Am I missing out some point or any rule

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 11

Re: A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduce   [#permalink] 28 Feb 2017, 01:32

Go to page   Previous    1  ...  11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22    Next  [ 437 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
SC- Companies in the United State 9 11 Jun 2012, 03:35
2 Arms talks from Geneva between China, the United States 2 20 Jan 2015, 11:07
7 In 1994 agreements existed between Canada and several 14 03 Jun 2017, 08:47
The border between the United States and Canada 3 10 May 2017, 02:58
A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States 1 30 Aug 2017, 20:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by