GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 24 Mar 2019, 06:35

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

An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es

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

Hide Tags

 
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 537
An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 09 Feb 2019, 00:25
3
9
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

49% (02:03) correct 51% (02:02) wrong based on 590 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.


(A) could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(B) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren't eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(C) couldn't be significantly weakened without restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species being eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(D) can't be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space


Originally posted by priyankur_saha@ml.com on 15 Mar 2009, 07:26.
Last edited by Bunuel on 09 Feb 2019, 00:25, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Community Reply
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 730
An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Mar 2009, 11:39
5
OA-E

OE-The difficulty here is that any of the sentences could be considered grammatically correct, but the reader needs to understand the meaning of the sentence. The first step is to understand that the welfare groups don't want the convention to be weakened (since they warn against it). That rules out answers C and D. The next piece to understand is how the convention would be weakened-namely through the easing of these restrictions. Answer A suggests eliminating the restrictions, so that it is incorrect. Answer B says the problem is if the restrictions 'aren't eased,' so B is incorrect. Answer E is correct.
=======
Anyone having the SC 800 document,the source of this Q?
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 118
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jan 2010, 08:00
3
(A) could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. seems awkward and if conditions seems to be more appropriate
(B) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren’t eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. seems correct and concise
(C) couldn’t be significantly weakened without restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species being eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.if conditions seems to be more appropriate
(D) can’t be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.seems awkward
(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. seems to alter meaning
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 4
Location: Delhi
Re: An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jan 2010, 10:44
2
I think
A - is very close...An international convention... could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, (the sentence sounds like a complete statement, perhaps an assertion but NOT a warning by welfare groups) hence makes the clause 'warn conservation and animal welfare groups' redundant.

B - meaning is opposite here...could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are (NOT aren't eased)...(International convention could be weakened...if restrictions are eased - this is the warning.

C - again the meaning is distorted....1st part of the sentence sounds like a complete statement which makes the clause 'could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren't eased' redundant.

D. CAN BE (NOT can't be) [/b]significantly weakened [/b]if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

E. Best choice :)

Cheers,
_________________

D'oh, I slipped on logic!

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
Posts: 43
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2011, 09:40
1
An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(A) could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. were is right here but 'it' is not specifying properly the convention. If we put convention in place if it ,it doesnot make sense.Also 'it' can specify to trade as well.

(B) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren't eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.Wrong as per sentence meaning
(C) couldn't be significantly weakened without restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species being eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. changes the meaning
(D) can't be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. strong statement
(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups. Right and correct in sentence meaning


IMO answer is E.Plz shed some light on same
SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2011, 12:46
1
Here's how you might think through this question to answer it without reading through all the answer choices:


Q: An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(A) could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

Step 1:I read the sentence above and notice that the phrase "were it not for" bothers me. What is "it" referring to? So immediately I'm suspicious about (A).


(B) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren't eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

Step 2:Looking at (B), this is opposite the original meaning! It shouldn't be "aren't eased"--it should be "are eased."

(C) couldn't be significantly weakened without restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species being eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

Step 3:With (C), just reading "couldn't be significantly weakened" without reading the rest of the answer choice, I already know (C) is not what we want because again--it changes the meaning of the sentence to what is actually OPPOSITE of what we want.

(D) can't be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

Step 4: (D): Same thing--"can't" should be "can"

(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

Step 5: (E): This captures the meaning we want correctly. Interesting how (B), (C), and (D) have the opposite meaning of what we want.

Only (A) and (E) have the meaning we want. (A) has the awkward "were it not for" phrase. So only (E) looks fine.
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1120
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 10:59
How could E be correct?

After "if" there a clause and two nouns:
(restrictions...ARE eased (clause), warn conservation (noun phrase) AND animal welfare groups (noun phrase).

A clause cannot be parallel with a noun.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 11:13
metallicafan wrote:
How could E be correct?

After "if" there a clause and two nouns:
(restrictions...ARE eased (clause), warn conservation (noun phrase) AND animal welfare groups (noun phrase).

A clause cannot be parallel with a noun.



Ah--I don't think you're reading the sentence correctly.

Try flipping the sentence.

"Conservation and animal welfare groups WARN an international convention... could be significantly weakened if restrictions are blah blah blah."

See if that helps.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 422
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 11:23
@ gmatpill in E (could/are) in the same sentence, is it ok in terms of verb/tense ? i read could is used for something possible in the past.

i am still not 100% clear about the usage of would/could .
SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 12:32
2
garimavyas wrote:
@ gmatpill in E (could/are) in the same sentence, is it ok in terms of verb/tense ? i read could is used for something possible in the past.

i am still not 100% clear about the usage of would/could .



"could" is not necessarily used to suggest something in the past.

You may be confusing "could" with "could have."

Quote:
(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.


Additionally, "are" is referring to RESTRICTIONS while "could" is referring to "an international convention."

So the phrasing is
"if restrictions are eased"

and

"an international convention could be significantly weakened"

They are completely separate from each other.

Hope that helps.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Status: Nothing comes easy: neither do I want.
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 2572
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15 (M)
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Reviews Badge
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 13:27
could you please explain again the flipping by writing the complete sentence.
_________________

Fight for your dreams :For all those who fear from Verbal- lets give it a fight

Money Saved is the Money Earned :)

Jo Bole So Nihaal , Sat Shri Akaal

:thanks Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog/Facebook :thanks

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Gmat test review :
http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-to-710-a-long-journey-without-destination-still-happy-141642.html

SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 16:47
5
gurpreetsingh wrote:
could you please explain again the flipping by writing the complete sentence.


Sure--here are 3 versions including original, flipped, and flipped/minimized.

(E original):
"An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups."

(E flipped):
"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

(E flipped and minimized):
"Conservation groups warn an international convention could be significantly weakened if restrictions are eased."
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Status: Nothing comes easy: neither do I want.
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 2572
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15 (M)
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Reviews Badge
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2011, 23:57
:) Thanks Zeke +1...

(E flipped):
"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

But I think this sentence is still not good.

It should be :

"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn THAT an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

Or

"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, THAT it could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

Since the sentence implies both the above meanings, don't you think it is not a good sentence?
_________________

Fight for your dreams :For all those who fear from Verbal- lets give it a fight

Money Saved is the Money Earned :)

Jo Bole So Nihaal , Sat Shri Akaal

:thanks Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog/Facebook :thanks

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Gmat test review :
http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-to-710-a-long-journey-without-destination-still-happy-141642.html

SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2282
Location: New York, NY
Re: weird language  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 May 2011, 08:20
gurpreetsingh wrote:
:) Thanks Zeke +1...

(E flipped):
"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

But I think this sentence is still not good.

It should be :

"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn THAT an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

Or

"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn an international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, THAT it could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased."

Since the sentence implies both the above meanings, don't you think it is not a good sentence?


Your second suggestion does not seem to make sense. The first one is ideally what we want.
"Conservation and animal welfare groups warn THAT an international convention regulating..." would be better. But when you flip sentences--don't expect every single word to be accounted for. This is not a math problem where every single word matches up.

Your job is to pick the best answer from the answer choices. You flip for the purpose of understanding the sentence---not to analyze missing words.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 04 Oct 2015
Posts: 240
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.56
Premium Member Reviews Badge
An international convention regulating trade in endangered  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 May 2017, 07:17
An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, especially bears and tigers, could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(A) could be significantly weakened were it not for restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(B) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species aren't eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.
--> change the intended meaning.

(C) couldn't be significantly weakened without restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species being eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.

(D) can't be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.
--> change the intended meaning.

(E) could be significantly weakened if restrictions on captive breeding of endangered species are eased, warn conservation and animal welfare groups.
--> correct.
_________________

Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one - Bruce Lee

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 May 2018
Posts: 51
Re: An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Mar 2019, 06:41
C and D need to be discarded right off the bat since they mean literally the opposite of the given sentence. ‘couldn’t’ and ‘can’t’, obviously, make negative assertions. I also see that B should be discarded for the same reason, ‘aren’t’ instead of ‘are’. A and E (actually all of the sentences) are grammatically correct, what we need to do is work with the meaning of the sentences. That in mind, I say E is correct because it is giving a clearer, more logical meaning than A.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es   [#permalink] 03 Mar 2019, 06:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by

An international convention regulating trade in endangered species, es

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


cron
Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

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®.