Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 16:02 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 16:02

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
SORT BY:
Date
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2018
Posts: 21
Own Kudos [?]: 203 [0]
Given Kudos: 116
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V35
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2019
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 09 Jul 2017
Posts: 14
Own Kudos [?]: 4 [0]
Given Kudos: 32
Send PM
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 2642
Own Kudos [?]: 7775 [0]
Given Kudos: 55
GMAT 2: 780  Q50  V50
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Expert Reply
ggdz The problem with E is that by making "spending" parallel with "requiring," it implies that the plan is spending time with patients. Clearly, only people (in this case, doctors) can spend time with patients.


As for your two example sentences, they both work and convey more or less the same meaning. Generally, we only bother to repeat structuring words ("that," in this case) when we need to make the meaning clear. For instance, we might need to show which parts are intended to be parallel, or we might want to show that two elements are meant to be separate. Consider a few cases:


I need to eat and sleep. This seems clear to me, but if I thought someone might worry that I was eating in my sleep, I could say "and to sleep" to make it clear that these are separate activities.


She said that the position was filled and that I need to update my resume. She said two things: 1) the position is filled, 2) I need to update my resume.


She said that the position was filled and I need to update my resume. Here, I may be quoting her in the first part and expressing my own idea in the second. I learned the position was filled and now I want to update my resume. Without "that" to indicate which parts are parallel, it's not clear.

Originally posted by DmitryFarber on 27 Apr 2019, 23:47.
Last edited by DmitryFarber on 28 Apr 2019, 00:02, edited 1 time in total.
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 2642
Own Kudos [?]: 7775 [0]
Given Kudos: 55
GMAT 2: 780  Q50  V50
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Expert Reply
sumitgoyal2727 There's no requirement that the modifier apply to both of the preceding clauses. In fact, it's not even modifying "require doctors . . . "--it's only modifying "see more patients."
Director
Director
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 778
Own Kudos [?]: 396 [0]
Given Kudos: 2198
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
MBAhereIcome wrote:
OA is D.

here's the explanation by ron.
you have to realize which verbs are supposed to be parallel and which aren't. there's no grammatical formula for this; you have to examine the meaning of the sentence to figure it out.
- 'impose' (in whatever form) should be parallel to 'require' (again, in whatever form). these are two different things, both of which are aspects of the plan (= logical parallelism).
- 'spend' should not be parallel to 'see', because it functions as a modifier of 'see' (it's a descriptive adverb modifier, detailing the way in which the doctors see the patients).



this is great explanation from Ron. thank you for posting here.

we can eliminate choice b,c and e because "spend/spending" refers to "plan". this modification is not logic.

choice a and d are left.
using the Ron explanation above is good. this question finally come to the difference between
do 1 and do 2
do 1 , comma doing 2.

we have to solve this split, which is very popular on og and gmatprep. using meaning analysis, we have to know the two actions should be parallel or should be in adverbial relation

see more doctor, spend less time.

they can not be 2 separate action but in adverbial relation. choice d is left.
Director
Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2017
Posts: 689
Own Kudos [?]: 415 [0]
Given Kudos: 778
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
lower-end insurance plans imposing....

From this it is very clear that imposing is modifying the plan.
1 Noun, modfier ( Modifier is modifying either the subject of main clause, or complete clause.)
2. Noun modifier ( Here modifier is modifying the attached noun. )

Please tell me where I am wrong.

It is matter of comma inserted between noun and modifier.

tarek99 wrote:
The reason "imposing" is wrong is that the following contruction is considered WRONG:

1) preposition + noun + present participle

Eg: James jumped over the cat speeding at 30 km.

In this sentence, is "speeding" modifying "the cat" or "James"?? We have "the cat" right after the preposition "over", and then "the cat" is followed by the present participle "speeding."

In option A, this is what we have:

in lower-end insurance plans imposing

Is "imposing" modifying "lower-end insurance plans" or is it modifying "union members" or "non union members"????
The construction "preposition + noun + present participle" creates this confusion.

One more note: Unlike the past participle, the present participle doesn't have to be placed right next to the noun that it modifies. The present participle can be placed far away from it referent noun, which is why "imposing" here creates an issue because we have 3 different nouns behind it.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2020
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Why can't " impose stricter limits on medical services " require doctors to visit more patients. Why is everybody saying Insurance plans only require doctors to visit more patients. Maybe because insurance plans impose stricter limits, they might require doctors to visit more patients.

I see why my explanation is wrong because there is no suitable verb in the given options for my thought process. But 99% of the answers directly assume that insurance plans do the two things. Can anyone explain me why?
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Posts: 273
Own Kudos [?]: 277 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.

(A) imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend "spend" is not logically parallel to anything and yet is marker with the list marker "and" unnecessarily. Eliminate.

(B) imposing stricter limits on medical services , requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending "requiring" and "spending" appear to modify "union members" (subject of previous clause) which does not make sense. Eliminate.

(C) that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend Placement of "and" before "spend" implies that "lower end insurance plans" are the entities that "spend less time...", which is incorrect. Eliminate.

(D) that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending Correct answer - above errors are rectified and no new errors are introduced. Usage of "spending" correctly modifies "doctors".

(E) that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending Placement of "and" before "spending" implies that "lower end insurance plans" are the entities that are "spending less time...", which is incorrect. Eliminate.

Hope this helps.
VP
VP
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1262
Own Kudos [?]: 201 [0]
Given Kudos: 332
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
tarek99 wrote:
The reason "imposing" is wrong is that the following contruction is considered WRONG:

1) preposition + noun + present participle

Eg: James jumped over the cat speeding at 30 km.

In this sentence, is "speeding" modifying "the cat" or "James"?? We have "the cat" right after the preposition "over", and then "the cat" is followed by the present participle "speeding."

In option A, this is what we have:

in lower-end insurance plans imposing

Is "imposing" modifying "lower-end insurance plans" or is it modifying "union members" or "non union members"????
The construction "preposition + noun + present participle" creates this confusion.

One more note: Unlike the past participle, the present participle doesn't have to be placed right next to the noun that it modifies. The present participle can be placed far away from it referent noun, which is why "imposing" here creates an issue because we have 3 different nouns behind it.


Great post. +1. I have run into decision points based on that versus present participials a lot lately and wasn't clear which is preferred.

Just want to check though. Are we sure that 'imposing' isn't modifying 'plans' solely? If not, then...

Are there instances where this rule is violated? e.g. If we don't have a preposition? So two instances...

1. Preposition is always involved OR
2. Either 'that' or present participial ending in -ing is OK
Intern
Intern
Joined: 19 Aug 2020
Posts: 47
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 77
Location: United Kingdom
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Hello,

I understand why answer D is the correct answer (meaning + parallelism).

However, I do not understand whether "imposing" in "...members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits ..." is correct ?

If not, why?

And would: "...members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans, imposing..." be correct?

Thanks in advance.



[quote="Ravshonbek"]Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.


(A) imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend

(B) imposing stricter limits on medical services , requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending

(C) that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend

(D) that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending

(E) that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending


[spoiler=]https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/21/us/race-gap-seen-in-health-care-of-equally-insured-patients.html
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Hi avigutman - in (E) - i thought the antecedent for "Each" is "patients".

(E) then becomes :

Quote:
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services,
requiring doctors to see more patients
and
spending less time with patients.


To me, the X and Y elements (in yellow), make complete sense with "Insurance plans IMPOSE"

The X and Y elements (in yellow) are adverbial and describe "THE RESULT OF" -- insurance plans IMPOSE stricter limits
Tutor
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Posts: 1304
Own Kudos [?]: 2287 [0]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
Hi avigutman - in (E) - i thought the antecedent for "Each" is "patients".

(E) then becomes :

Quote:
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services,
requiring doctors to see more patients
and
spending less time with patients.


To me, the X and Y elements (in yellow), make complete sense with "Insurance plans IMPOSE"

The X and Y elements (in yellow) are adverbial and describe "THE RESULT OF" -- insurance plans IMPOSE stricter limits

Who is spending less time with patients, jabhatta2?

Posted from my mobile device
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
avigutman wrote:
jabhatta2 wrote:
Hi avigutman - in (E) - i thought the antecedent for "Each" is "patients".

(E) then becomes :

Quote:
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services,
requiring doctors to see more patients
and
spending less time with patients.


To me, the X and Y elements (in yellow), make complete sense with "Insurance plans IMPOSE"

The X and Y elements (in yellow) are adverbial and describe "THE RESULT OF" -- insurance plans IMPOSE stricter limits

Who is spending less time with patients, jabhatta2?

Posted from my mobile device


hmmm avigutman - does it matter ?

It is the “Insurance plans’ IMPOSITION” that is resulting in [(Something) spending less time with patients]

I got the impression that it didn’t matter what that (something) was that was spending less time with patients – (Something) could be doctors / nurses / day care workers / retired home care workers…

What mattered much more was (Something -whatever it maybe) is spending less time with patients BECAUSE OF “insurance plans’ IMPOSITION

As long as the Y element was
(i) negative in nature
(ii) made sense with Plan's IMPOSITION

, The Y element was good to do - doesnt matter what that (something) is specifcally
Director
Director
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Posts: 529
Own Kudos [?]: 366 [0]
Given Kudos: 748
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Naptiste wrote:

Here is the original New York Times sentence, and it has two THATs:
Members of minorities are more likely than whites to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services, and that require doctors to see more patients, spending less time with each.

The second THAT is really useful. It makes the sentence clearer, easier to read and understand.

The OA does not have the second THAT. So the OA is harder to read and understand.

This is a GMATPREP question, ours not to reason why :) (the test writers probably wanted to make a hard question).

Posted from my mobile device
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
vv65 wrote:
Naptiste wrote:

Here is the original New York Times sentence, and it has two THATs:
Members of minorities are more likely than whites to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services, and that require doctors to see more patients, spending less time with each.

The second THAT is really useful. It makes the sentence clearer, easier to read and understand.

The OA does not have the second THAT. So the OA is harder to read and understand.

This is a GMATPREP question, ours not to reason why :) (the test writers probably wanted to make a hard question).

Posted from my mobile device


hi - could you assist on why the second "that" makes the sentence clearer ?

dropping the second "That" - doesnt seem to lead to ambigous meanings

could you assist ?
Director
Director
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Posts: 529
Own Kudos [?]: 366 [0]
Given Kudos: 748
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
jabhatta2 wrote:
vv65 wrote:
Naptiste wrote:

Here is the original New York Times sentence, and it has two THATs:
Members of minorities are more likely than whites to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services, and that require doctors to see more patients, spending less time with each.

The second THAT is really useful. It makes the sentence clearer, easier to read and understand.

The OA does not have the second THAT. So the OA is harder to read and understand.

This is a GMATPREP question, ours not to reason why :) (the test writers probably wanted to make a hard question).

Posted from my mobile device


hi - could you assist on why the second "that" makes the sentence clearer ?

dropping the second "That" - doesnt seem to lead to ambigous meanings

could you assist ?

When I said that the sentence with the second THAT is clearer, I was speaking for myself. I found it easier to read and understand, so I assumed the same is true for others too. But it's possible others find both sentences equally hard/easy.

Why I prefer the New York Times sentence:
1. The second THAT makes the parallelism clearer: insurance plans impose stricter limits and insurance plans require doctors to see more patients.
2. The second THAT makes it clearer what 'spending less time with each' modifies.
Tutor
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Posts: 1304
Own Kudos [?]: 2287 [0]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Send PM
Re: Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
I got the impression that it didn’t matter what that (something) was that was spending less time with patients – (Something) could be doctors / nurses / day care workers / retired home care workers…

What mattered much more was (Something -whatever it maybe) is spending less time with patients BECAUSE OF “insurance plans’ IMPOSITION

As long as the Y element was
(i) negative in nature
(ii) made sense with Plan's IMPOSITION

, The Y element was good to do - doesnt matter what that (something) is specifcally

What's your reaction to this sentence?
Quote:
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services, spending less time with each.

What do you think this sentence is saying, jabhatta2?
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Hi GMATGuruNY - you mention the following regarding (D) in the screenshot Here is the link just in case - (Link here

You mention, when reviewing a COMMA + Verb ING - look for the nearest subject and preceeding verb

So when looking at (D)

Nearest subject = Doctor
Preceeding verb = To see ?

But - how is "to see" the last preceding verb ?

"To see" is just an infinitive.

Infinitives themselves are not verbs

Infinitives can functions as subjects of sentences | object nouns | adjectives | adverbs but infinitives THEMSELVES are not verbs

Could you please assist as to how infinitives (To see) is a verb ?
Attachments

screenshot 6.jpg
screenshot 6.jpg [ 128 KiB | Viewed 473 times ]

Tutor
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 1315
Own Kudos [?]: 3136 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Schools:Dartmouth College
Send PM
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
Infinitives themselves are not verbs


The statement above is misleading: an infinitive (to + VERB) is in fact a verb form.
For proof, check my most recent post here.
The American Heritage dictionary defines an infinitive as follows:
A verb form that functions as a substantive while retaining certain verbal characteristics.
GMAT Club Bot
Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union [#permalink]
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne