Join us for MBA Spotlight – The Top 20 MBA Fair      Schedule of Events | Register

 It is currently 06 Jun 2020, 06:57

### 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

# An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 7
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2009, 01:37
2
16
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

42% (02:31) correct 58% (02:30) wrong based on 605 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.3 mile-wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use, the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.
(B) The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.
(C) The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.
(D) The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.
(E) The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.
Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 137
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 10 Jun 2018, 11:28
7
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.3 mile-wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use, the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.

The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.

The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.

The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.

The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.

The argument presents two possible plans to complete the pipeline: lay it underwater; lay it over the water. The author favors the plan of the bridge. The first boldface portion weakens the bridge option by stating that it's relatively expensive. The second boldface portion is the logical reasoning behind the government's choice to choose the bridge despite its higher cost.

Where in the passage does it imply that the author favors the plan of the bridge? It only says that the government is in favor of the bridge.

Originally posted by anon1 on 12 Nov 2012, 19:04.
Last edited by Bunuel on 10 Jun 2018, 11:28, edited 2 times in total.
##### General Discussion
Intern
Status: Applying Now
Joined: 21 Nov 2009
Posts: 49
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
Re: Help me with Boldface...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2009, 05:39
I think the correct answer is D

Position to be undermined: laying of pipeline is cheaper

evidence in support of position build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed

reasoning behind questioning of that position to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure
Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 126
Re: Help me with Boldface...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2009, 07:59
1
I hate boldface questions. I thought the answer was A, but after reading the explanation for D, I agree it should be D.
Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 83
Re: Help me with Boldface...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2009, 13:07
1
(A) The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.
First is correct;Ssecond doesnot contradict,it helps support position..OUT
(B) The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.
FIRST IS CORRECT;SECOND IS NOT A VIEWPOINT RATHER IS ANOTHER FACTOR ..OUT
(C) The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.
SECOND IS NOT THE AIM,IT IS A FACT..OUT
(D) The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.
FIRST IS CORRECT;SECOND IS A FACT WHICH ACTS LIKE A REASON..CORRECT
(E) The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.
FIRST IS NOT A PROPOSAL..OUT
Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 200
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an und  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2012, 19:43
1
1
anon1 wrote:
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.3 mile-wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use, the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.
The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.
The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.
The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.
The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.

The argument presents two possible plans to complete the pipeline: lay it underwater; lay it over the water. The author favors the plan of the bridge. The first boldface portion weakens the bridge option by stating that it's relatively expensive. The second boldface portion is the logical reasoning behind the government's choice to choose the bridge despite its higher cost.

Where in the passage does it imply that the author favors the plan of the bridge? It only says that the government is in favor of the bridge.

The engineering firm suggests building pipe (for the reasons mentioned in the 1st bold face). Govt decides to go with the bridge for the reasons mentioned in the 2nd boldface.
Option D->
The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; - True. here "argument chooses to undermine" means "the author chooses to go against the engineering firm's suggestion" the position given in bold states the firm's position not Govt's
the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position. -> yes the 2nd bold gives a reason for the Govt's decision.
GMAT Tutor
Status: Private GMAT Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 161
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an und  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Nov 2012, 08:04
anon1 wrote:
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.3 mile-wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use, the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.

The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.

The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.

The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.

The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.

The argument presents two possible plans to complete the pipeline: lay it underwater; lay it over the water. The author favors the plan of the bridge. The first boldface portion weakens the bridge option by stating that it's relatively expensive. The second boldface portion is the logical reasoning behind the government's choice to choose the bridge despite its higher cost.

Where in the passage does it imply that the author favors the plan of the bridge? It only says that the government is in favor of the bridge.

The author says that "...the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge". The use of "rightly" tells us that the author agrees with the plan of the govt. If this word is eliminated, then we will not be sure of author's position.

Regards,
CJ
_________________
Intern
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Posts: 3
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2013, 04:48
A tranquil scene, to be sure. But there is nothing tranquil about feelings here toward tankers - or more specifically, a pipeline promising to replace many of them. Currently, a pipeline is being proposed to bring approximately 30 trillion cubic feet of stranded gas on the North Slope of Alaska to markets. Many different competing schemes have been investigated, but the most likely to succeed is a pipeline south to the Fairbanks area, and then southeast along the Alaska Highway into Canada.
Princeton Review Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Posts: 155
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2013, 07:50
1
anon1 wrote:
An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.3 mile-wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use, the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

The first explains circumstances that call the position taken by the author into question; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position.

The first provides a description of a certain factor which may weaken the argument's favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.

The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.

The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position.

The first is a proposal that is supported by the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal.

The argument presents two possible plans to complete the pipeline: lay it underwater; lay it over the water. The author favors the plan of the bridge. The first boldface portion weakens the bridge option by stating that it's relatively expensive. The second boldface portion is the logical reasoning behind the government's choice to choose the bridge despite its higher cost.

Where in the passage does it imply that the author favors the plan of the bridge? It only says that the government is in favor of the bridge.

the trick here is that you are not trying to change or evaluate the argument. Sure there is plenty wrong with the logic but the question asks you about the bolded phrases. Do them one at a time. How does the first sentence fit with the conclusion - The first statemetn somewhat contradicts the conclusion (why would the gov't build a bridge if it were more expensive?). Eliminate C and E for this reason.
the second is supporting information for the conclusion - eliminate A because it does not undermine the position and B becuase it is supporting information, not the viewpoint itself. D is the best answer.
Manager
Status: Training
Joined: 03 Jun 2013
Posts: 73
GPA: 3.7
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2013, 14:04
Hey Guys,

Just wondering why nobody has considered (C)?

The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument's conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion.

I think some people interpret establish grounds to mean "offers some sort of evidence in SUPPORT of the conclusion; however, I disagree with that assessment.

Establish grounds, to me, simply means to provide information that will aid in one's ability to evaluate the argument.

The first boldfaced portion definitely does that. Certainly, it provides some evidence that might seem to contradict our choice, but really the statement just plays a 'devil's advocate' role and points out a counter-argument which we then show to be overridden.

Part of any convincing argument is consideration of the other side. So I believe that the first boldface portion does establish grounds.

Also, the second part does seem to be the aim leading to that conclusion.

The conclusion is that we have reason to build the albeit more expensive bridge.

The aim of building this bridge is indeed to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ...

Am I totally off-base here?

Edit: while I concede that 'grounds' implies support, counterarguments definitely help to establish grounds. So if the question said that 'the first bolded statement is grounds', I'd agree that this would be incorrect. However, if the question said that 'the first bolded statement helps to establish grounds', I'd say that this is definitely correct. So the actual option, 'establishes grounds', I believe is ambiguous, and open to either interpretation.
Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 245
Schools: LBS '14 (A\$)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2013, 00:55
HI Matt,

I think your long argument sort of tells you that you've had to work too hard to make this fit...

If you look at D - it's much more simple and clear that it's correct.

Now, I can if I think long and hard sort of understand your reasoning behind C - even though in the end I don't agree with it, but crucially on GMAT we're not looking for a long discussion of right and wrong. It's multiple choice - pick the best answer and move on. That answer is D.

If you have questions over D and think C is better - then that's a different discussion...

James
Manager
Status: Training
Joined: 03 Jun 2013
Posts: 73
GPA: 3.7
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2013, 03:12
plumber250 wrote:
HI Matt,

I think your long argument sort of tells you that you've had to work too hard to make this fit...

If you look at D - it's much more simple and clear that it's correct.

Now, I can if I think long and hard sort of understand your reasoning behind C - even though in the end I don't agree with it, but crucially on GMAT we're not looking for a long discussion of right and wrong. It's multiple choice - pick the best answer and move on. That answer is D.

If you have questions over D and think C is better - then that's a different discussion...

James

Hi James,

I suppose you're right. This is one of the many psychological obstacles that are in the way of my achieving a great score.

While I realize on an intellectual level that the GMAT is just about choosing the best answer, it still REALLY bothers me if I see more than one answer that seems to fit the question.

Thanks
Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 174
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Oct 2013, 04:47
Can somebody please tell me why C is wrong?
Intern
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 46
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GPA: 3
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Oct 2013, 06:41
1
mohnish104 wrote:
Can somebody please tell me why C is wrong?

The first boldface goes against the argument's conclusion whereas C says 'establish grounds for the argument's conclusion'. Also, the second boldface is not an aim, it is a fact.

So C gets ruled out.

you can visit the link to see more discussions. http://gmatclub.com/forum/an-engineering-firm-has-suggested-the-construction-of-an-88046.html

Kudos if you like

Good luck!
Intern
Status: Joining Cranfield Sep 2014
Joined: 01 Sep 2012
Posts: 46
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 530 Q50 V14
GMAT 2: 630 Q48 V29
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2013, 03:59
1
mohnish104 wrote:
Can somebody please tell me why C is wrong?

Premise 1:- An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the supply route of an oil system connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. (Suggestion by Engineering Firm)
Premise 2:- The route crosses a 1.3 mile wide river, and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed.
Premise 3:- In order to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe's segments due to water pressure, a fairly likely occurrence at some point in the pipe's duration of use,
Conclusion: - the government rightly plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

(A) – Incorrect as the first is not circumstance and second is not contradicting any position.

(B) Incorrect as the first does provide the description of a certain factor but it is not weakening the view point mentioned in the 2nd Bold Face

(C) – This choice is very close to correct choice, but the point which is incorrect is the statement “comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument’s conclusion”. The second bold statement is correct

(D) – It is important here to understand what position the first bold statement is supporting, because once you understand the position, you will understand the second bold statement also. The position here referred is “the low cost associated with laying of pipe on the river-bed” . The first statement indeed is evidence in support to above mentioned position and the second bold statement is the reasoning behind the questioning of that position because the second bold statement informs why you cannot have underwater oil pipline. So statement D is correct answer

(E) – The first bold statement is not a proposal, it is a comparative statement or fact and further the second bold statement is an independent statement and it is not strengthening the proposal mentioned in the first bold statement.
VP
Joined: 18 Dec 2017
Posts: 1381
Location: United States (KS)
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2019, 10:19
11MBA wrote:
I hate boldface questions. I thought the answer was A, but after reading the explanation for D, I agree it should be D.

You're probably not an active user any longer.

I understand that a lot of us hate BF questions mostly because they are tricky.

But I have come to realisation that you have to do 2 simple things: Find Conclusion. And figure out what the BF's are doing to the conclusion. Support/Against/Fact. With this approach you will at least boil down to 2 options.

Coming back to this question: I boiled down to A and D but marked A. Could have spent 10 more seconds and thought about it. But at 2m 15 seconds mark I thought to pick one which one is likely to do on the day of the exam
_________________
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long

Why You Don’t Deserve A 700 On Your GMAT

Learn from the Legend himself: All GMAT Ninja LIVE YouTube videos by topic
You are missing on great learning if you don't know what this is: Project SC Butler
Re: An engineering firm has suggested the construction of an   [#permalink] 23 Nov 2019, 10:19