A wildlife expert predicts that the reintroduction of the caribou into

The rules for if/then constructions are pretty straightforward. The verb tense in the "if" clause will dictate the verb tense of the "then" clause. As dcummins noted, there are three scenarios we might encounter.

1) Present tense in the "if" clause: "If my daughter forgets to eat, she will scream at me for several hours in the middle of the night." "Forgets" is present tense, so the verb in the "then" clause will be future tense.

2) Past tense in the "if" clause: "If my daughter forgot to eat, she would scream at me for several hours in the middle of the night." "Forgot" is past tense, so the verb in the "then" clause takes "would." (Think of "would" as speaking about the future from the perspective of the past.)

3) Past perfect tense in the "if" clause: If my daughter had forgotten to eat, she would have screamed at me for several hours in the middle of the night." "Had forgotten" is past perfect, so the "then" takes requires "would have."

Back to the original sentence:

"A wildlife expert predicts that the reintroduction of the caribou into northern Minnesota will fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is greater than one wolf for every 39 square miles."

Because the verb in the "if" clause is the present tense "is," the verb tense in the "then" clause takes the future tense "will," so this is an instance of scenario 1 above. It's a little bit harder to recognize because we're accustomed to seeing the "if" clause first, but in this sentence, the order is flipped. However, the logic would be exactly the same if we'd been given: "If the density of the timber population in that region is greater than one wolf for every 39 square miles, the reintroduction of caribou into northern Minnesota will fail."

I hope that helps!

A wildlife expert predicts that the reintroduction of the caribou into northern Minnesota would fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more numerous than one wolf for every 39 square miles.

A) would fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more numerous than
B )would fail provided the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more than
C )should fail if the timber wolf density in that region was greater than
D )will fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is greater than
E) will fail if the timber wolf density in that region were more numerous than

There are two approachs to solve this question:

a) According to some experts, the difference between WILL and WOULD is related to the certainty of
the information expressed in the sentence. In other words, how sure is the author about that topic.
In this sentence, the expert is sure that the reintroduction of the caribou WILL fail if the timber population is greater. If he were not so sure, we would have to use WOULD.

b) According to other experts, using WILL or WOULD depends on the tense of the sentence. If the tense is present we use WILL when we refer to the future. If the tense of the sentence is past, we use WOULD when we refer to the past. It's like reported speech.

What do you think about these two approachs? IMO, the second one is the correct IN THIS SENTENCE. Because the author is reporting something that the expert said, predicted.

What do you think?

For conditional (if X then Y) questions, you need to have corresponding tenses, depending on whether you have a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd conditional.
1st conditional: If X happens, then Y will happen
2nd conditional: If X happened, then Y would happen
3rd conditional: If X had happened, then Y would have happened

A) would fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more numerous than
(the verb tenses here do not match any of the above structures)
ELIMINATE

B) would fail provided the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more than
(the verb tenses here do not match any of the above structures)
ELIMINATE

C) shuld fail if the timber wolf density in that region was greater than
"Should" changes the meaning.
ELIMINATE

D) will fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is greater than
(the verb tenses here match the structure of a 1st conditional)
KEEP!

E) will fail if the timber wolf density in that region were more numerous than
(the verb tenses here do not match any of the above structures)
ELIMINATE


Answer: D

Cheers,
Brent

A wildlife expert predicts that the reintroduction of the caribou into northern Minnesota would fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more numerous than one wolf for every 39 square miles.

A) would fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more numerous than
B) would fail provided the density of the timber wolf population in that region is more than
C) should fail if the timber wolf density in that region was greater than
D) will fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is greater than
E) will fail if the timber wolf density in that region were more numerous than

This belongs to the first category conditional, where you use a present tense in the 'if' clause and a simple present or a simple future in the ‘then’ clause. We can conveniently ignore A, B and C for using the modal verb ' would ' and 'should'. Between D and E, we can eliminate E for using a countable ‘more numerous’ rather than the ‘greater’ for an obvious mass noun namely ‘density’

The basic rule:
There are 2 ways to indicate a conditional situation.

"Were the piano out of tune, I would pay to have it tuned." (O)
"If the piano is out of tune, I will pay to have it tuned." (O)

So you use If/will or Were/would for conditionals.

But you never mix these two.
"If the piano is out of tune, I would pay to have it tuned." (X)
"Were the piano out of tune, I will pay to have it tuned." (X)


Rare Case:
If a given sentence is clear that it has subjunctive/conditional statement, you can use if/were as clauses.
The famous Johnny Cash's lyric from <If I were a Carpenter> runs like this:
If I were a carpenter, and you were a lady, would you marry me anyway?


So wrapping up,
use if/is for definitive conditional, if/were for purely speculative conditional.

Refer to page 269 of OG 2019 Verbal Review for further reference under Conditionals and subjunctives section.

Hi sujit2k7,

To answer your question, yes, "more numerous" is different from "more than". While “more than”, as you yourself mentioned, can go with both countable and uncountable nouns, “more numerous” (meaning more in number) can’t possibly go with uncountable nouns. To take one of your examples, can you say “Plant X needs more numerous care than plant Y?” This does not make sense.

In any case, I think “more numerous” has a bit of wordiness and redundancy, and is better avoided even for countable nouns. “More” is enough to indicate greater in number.

Cheers,
Rakesh

the Construction of sentence in if then relaionship is: Present tense with future tense
Past Tense with Future tense.
So, option 'D' is clearly satisfying this condition.

I believe it is not and the answer is D. In general, the Hypothetical Subjunctive is associated with unlikely or unreal circumstances. This is a prediction but does not fit the bill.

In this case, "greater than" and "more than" are almost certainly viewed as synonymous comparison terms. If you look closely, you are really dealing with "greater than" and "more numerous than", and in both cases the phrases properly compare a future state against the stated benchmark. So yes, your assumption about greater than/more than was off. For GMAT comparisons questions, you will see errors/splits on the things being compared (comparing things illogically) or you will see obvious errors in the comparison phrases ("more as" instead of "more than").

Your analysis of is/were is right on. These verb tense splits are very often tested on the GMAT, so for this problem you should have picked the answer choice that got the verb tense correct.

KW

Happy to help. Here are a few quick examples:

The waste material was rejected because the known carcinogen content was greater than 1 part per million
The waste material was rejected because the known carcinogen content was more numerous than 1 part per million.

My candy intake is greater than 2 pieces per day.
My candy intake is more numerous than 2 pieces per day.

With these examples you see that both are probably fine, but the "greater than" examples seem to have a more sensible (or understandable) meaning. In both cases, the comparison doesn't really compare to things, but rather they compare something against a benchmark (1 part per million, 2 pieces per day).

Hope that helps!

KW

whenever we see "if" we have to check weather the form of "will" or "no will" is correct.

there are 4 kinds

if do, then do: this is a fact not hypothetic

if do, then will do
if did, then would do
if had done, then would/could have done

there 3 kind is about hypotheticl not fact. we do not need to know the difference among 3 kinds because gmat can not test us on this point. just to know that last 3 kinds are about hypothetic action and the first one is a fact.

only knowing this point can allow us to go to oa.

second point
we never use physical description for some thing which can be measured by unit. density is 3 persons/m2, which can be measured and can not be described with "numerous" which is physical description. "greater" is used with number and so is correct.

D) will fail if the density of the timber wolf population in that region is greater than
(the verb tenses here match the structure of a 2nd conditional)
Did you mean, 1st conditional?

If..then constructions have strict verb tense rules as follows:

1. If Simple Present Then Simple Present or Simple Future

2. If Simple Past Then Simple PAST or WOULD VERB

3. If Past Perfect then WOULD HAVE <Verb>

To answer your question, yes, "more numerous" is different from "more than". While “more than”, as you yourself mentioned, can go with both countable and uncountable nouns, “more numerous” (meaning more in number) can’t possibly go with uncountable nouns. To take one of your examples, can you say "Plant X needs more numerous care than plant Y?” This does not make sense.

Can you give few more examples for more numerous v/s more than?

Is not the "If" part a "Hypothetical Subjunctive"?

The previous poster is right on. As the name suggests, the subjunctive is only used for things that haven't happen, are not happening and frankly aren't likely to happen. For example, "It would be funny if you were to wear a clown suit to work." I don't know anything about you, but it's probably safe to say that you wouldn't wear a clown suit to work.

In this example, we are dealing with an "expert" who is making a prediction about what is likely to happen in the future, therefore this would not use the 'hypothetical' subjunctive.

KW

Hi Kyle

I chose E over D on the the following points and I would like to know your opinion.

Greater than - this is used while comparing two different things, for example, the deficit level of state X is greater than that of state y
More than - this is used while talking about the increase in the same parameter, for example, the deficit level of state x is now more than double of what it was last year.

I presumed, perhaps foolishly, that "more numerous than" is a sub category of "more than". Was this a wrong assumption to make?

I also feel that "were" is usually used to provide an alternate reality for the present. "If I were a rich man.." I am not a rich man right now but if I were a rich man now....
"We will treat this issue as if were trivial and plan accordingly" The issue is in fact quite serious but we will treat it as a trivial one.

The expert is not making a hypothetical case in which the population timber wolf is less than 1/39 sq miles but rather he is talking about a possible conceivable future in which the population could go beyond 1/39 sq miles. Therefore were can not be used here.

Hence I was stuck between a problem in each D and E and I chose E over D. Perhaps my "greater than" issue is in fact a non-issue.