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

It is currently 19 Oct 2018, 15:02

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

Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than

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

Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3031
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Dec 2016, 08:20
1
natley4788 wrote:
I understand why the past perfect "had reduced" is correct here - but how can the simple past tense "blocked" in the relative clause be correct? Doesn't this imply that the sequence of events is: "landings are reduced" followed by "the culverts blocked shad migrations"? But how is this logical? First the migrations are blocked by the culverts and subsequently (or perhaps at the same time) landings are reduced, so the verb tense for "blocked" should either be the same as "reduced" or further in the past then "reduced". Shouldn't the correct use of verb tenses be:
"...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAD BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

?


The sequential relation is required to be established between the time reference 1920 and the verb "had reduced". The verb "blocked" is not a part of this relationship - hence past perfect is not to be used for this verb.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Nov 2016
Posts: 10
Location: Australia
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45
GPA: 4
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Dec 2016, 20:45
sayantanc2k wrote:
natley4788 wrote:
I understand why the past perfect "had reduced" is correct here - but how can the simple past tense "blocked" in the relative clause be correct? Doesn't this imply that the sequence of events is: "landings are reduced" followed by "the culverts blocked shad migrations"? But how is this logical? First the migrations are blocked by the culverts and subsequently (or perhaps at the same time) landings are reduced, so the verb tense for "blocked" should either be the same as "reduced" or further in the past then "reduced". Shouldn't the correct use of verb tenses be:
"...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAD BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

?


The sequential relation is required to be established between the time reference 1920 and the verb "had reduced". The verb "blocked" is not a part of this relationship - hence past perfect is not to be used for this verb.


Great answer, thanks sayantanc.

Since the verb "blocked" does not need to be part of this sequential relationship, could another verb tense have been used correctly (i.e. if answer option B was one of the below, would it have been correct?)

  • Present Simple tense (for an event the recurs) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that BLOCK shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"
  • Present Perfect tense (for an event that occurred in the past and continues to be true) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAVE BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

?
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3031
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Dec 2016, 04:33
natley4788 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
natley4788 wrote:
I understand why the past perfect "had reduced" is correct here - but how can the simple past tense "blocked" in the relative clause be correct? Doesn't this imply that the sequence of events is: "landings are reduced" followed by "the culverts blocked shad migrations"? But how is this logical? First the migrations are blocked by the culverts and subsequently (or perhaps at the same time) landings are reduced, so the verb tense for "blocked" should either be the same as "reduced" or further in the past then "reduced". Shouldn't the correct use of verb tenses be:
"...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAD BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

?


The sequential relation is required to be established between the time reference 1920 and the verb "had reduced". The verb "blocked" is not a part of this relationship - hence past perfect is not to be used for this verb.


Great answer, thanks sayantanc.

Since the verb "blocked" does not need to be part of this sequential relationship, could another verb tense have been used correctly (i.e. if answer option B was one of the below, would it have been correct?)

  • Present Simple tense (for an event the recurs) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that BLOCK shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"
  • Present Perfect tense (for an event that occurred in the past and continues to be true) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAVE BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

?


Yes, any tense could be used instead depending on the meaning required to be conveyed.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 03 Jan 2017
Posts: 157
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Mar 2017, 15:01
C, E out: amount is used with uncountable
D having blocked modifies clause incorrectly and is wordy
A is wrong because of the false tense used
Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 999
Location: Bangalore, India
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Mar 2017, 00:37
natley4788 wrote:
Shouldn't the correct use of verb tenses be:
"...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAD BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

Hi natley4788, that would not be a great construct. Normally, past perfect is used to depict chronological sequence of two events/instances that happened one after the other in the past. Here however, clearly milldams and culverts were still there in 1920. So, at the very least, had blocked would make the sequence quite cryptic to understand.

Quote:
could another verb tense have been used correctly (i.e. if answer option B was one of the below, would it have been correct?)

Present Simple tense (for an event the recurs) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that BLOCK shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

Present Perfect tense (for an event that occurred in the past and continues to be true) -> "...the proliferation of milldams and culverts that HAVE BLOCKED shad migrations up their spawning streams HAD REDUCED landings to less than four million pounds"

That would be incorrect because the entire sentence talks about events/instances that happened in the past. So, we cannot be using present tense.
_________________

Thanks,
Ashish
EducationAisle, Bangalore

Sentence Correction Nirvana available on Amazon.in and Flipkart

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 255
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Apr 2017, 05:12
Hi mikemcgarry,

Long time no see.
How are you?

Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

(A) that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
(B) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
(C) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount
(D) having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less
(E) having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower

When I practiced this question,

I first eliminated choice C, D because past perfect (had reduced ) is necessary if there is a signal " by 1920" that means an action happens before a past time,

second, I think "having blocked" is ok if modifies preceding noun "milldams and culverts"

third, I think block ... from doing is a good idiom, so i eliminated A, and E, unfortunately, I haven't read the idiom issue throughout the posts., Am i right ?

Last, I think less than is more concise than a lower amount / an amount lower


Although I got the right answer choice B, I have some confusion when i checked the OA, so i genuinely want your help.

First OA said "migrations up their spawning streams" in choice A is incorrect, I am not sure why it is incorrect

Second, In choice D and E, "having blocked ... streams" should be set off in commas, this point is opposite of my reasoning above (second),

Does OA mean that "having blocked ... streams" is nonessential modifier ? so it should be set off in commas ?
while I think that "having blocked ... streams" is essential modifier, so it can follow the noun "milldams and culverts"

Mike, please help correct my fault.

thanks so much in deed.

Have a nice day.
>_~
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Feb 2017
Posts: 13
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 May 2017, 11:39
Quick question:

In B, shouldn't "blocked" be in the past perfect? The block happened first, and then came the reduction?

Or is blocked OK because it's part of the noun modifying phrase that modifies milldams and culverts, and the only verb that connects to 1920 is reduced, requiring a past perfect?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 04 Oct 2015
Posts: 282
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.56
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 May 2017, 17:44
Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

(A) that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(B) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(C) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount

(D) having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less

(E) having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower
_________________

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 04 Oct 2015
Posts: 282
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.56
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2017, 09:10
Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

(A) that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
(B) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
(C) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount
(D) having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less
(E) having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower
_________________

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Posts: 56
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2017, 07:41
Hi All,

Can someone please summarize the concept here as I feel this is a very different concept and not covered explicitly in any notes or by anyone. Going through the thread, I think I have a rough idea about this but I am not 100% sure on this. Would be great if somebody can summarize this please.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Status: IF YOU CAN DREAM IT, YOU CAN DO IT
Joined: 03 Jul 2017
Posts: 207
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, International Business
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Oct 2017, 05:38
Can someone let me know the exceptional rule for the past perfect tense. Thank you
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 389
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Reviews Badge
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Oct 2017, 05:45
longhaul123 wrote:
Can someone let me know the exceptional rule for the past perfect tense. Thank you


Hi longhaul123,

Here is the link I used: https://gmatclub.com/forum/rule-for-sim ... 81001.html

I have found it immensely helpful and concise, and I hope you do too!
_________________

D-Day: November 18th, 2017

Need a laugh and a break? Go here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/mental-break-funny-videos-270269.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Oct 2017
Posts: 7
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Dec 2017, 13:32
How is B the right answer??? It uses Past Perfect tense for an event that is happening later in the timeline. Pls help.
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2706
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Dec 2017, 15:30
monidip1010 wrote:
How is B the right answer??? It uses Past Perfect tense for an event that is happening later in the timeline. Pls help.



Hello monidip1010,

I will be glad to help you out with this one. :-)


This official sentence uses the phrase by 1920. Whenever the phrase by 1234 is used in a sentence, it requires the usage of past perfect tense. It is so because the expression denotes that first some other action took place, and then 1234 arrived.

Same is the case with the usage of by 1920 in this official sentence. Presence of this phrase says that over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts had already reduced the amount of landings by the time 1920 arrived. Hence, use of past perfect tense verb had reduced is correct.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 422
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Dec 2017, 22:15
JarvisR wrote:
Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

(A) that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(B) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(C) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount

(D) having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less

(E) having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower


"by 1920" shows that "had done" is needed. had done is used to show an action happen before a past point of time. we go to choice A and B
choice A use "have blocked" . this tense is complex. it is used to say an action beginning in the past and continue until present. this case is popular and never is used wrongly

present perfect also is used to say about past actions WITHOUT PAST POINT OF TIME. in this case present perfect is interchangeable with SIMPLE PAST.

this is two main uses of present perfect.

present perfect never is used to show a past actions WITH PAST POINT OF TIME.
choice A is wrong.
gmat test the very basic grammar.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 422
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Dec 2017, 02:23
1
JarvisR wrote:
Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, over-fishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

(A) that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(B) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less

(C) that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount

(D) having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less

(E) having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower


look at choice B, why "that blocked" is right ?

the basic point of past perfect is that it is used to show an action happen before a past point of time . this point dose not mean that past perfect show an action which happen before all the actions presented by past simple in the sentence.

in choice b, it dose not mean that " had reduced landing"happen before "blocked shad". the action of "blocked shad" is happenning at 1920, at the time of speaking, skeaking is in the past. so, choice b is logic.

so, at 1920, the overfishing still block ( presented by simple past) and finish reducing (presented by past perfect). at 1920, action of blocking still happen and action of reducing is finished. the sequence of actions/tenses is logic.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Posts: 282
Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 07 Jan 2018, 11:06
1
262. Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, overfishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

A. that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
B. that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
C. that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount
D. having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less
E. having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower


Don't understand the usage of 'had'

NOTE: ACTIVE DISCUSSION OF THIS TOPIC can be found here

Originally posted by AshutoshB on 07 Jan 2018, 07:09.
Last edited by generis on 07 Jan 2018, 11:06, edited 1 time in total.
Senior SC Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 2035
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jan 2018, 11:47
AshutoshB wrote:
262. Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than seventeen million pounds of shad in a single year, but by 1920, overfishing and the proliferation of milldams and culverts that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less than four million pounds.

A. that have blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
B. that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams had reduced landings to less
C. that blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to a lower amount
D. having blocked shad from migrating up their spawning streams reduced landings to less
E. having blocked shad migrations up their spawning streams had reduced landings to an amount lower


Don't understand the usage of 'had'

AshutoshB , please see this expert's reply to the same question. Various posts in [url]https://gmatclub.com/forum/around-1900-fishermen-in-the-chesapeake-bay-area-landed-more-than-203779.html]this thread with an identical topic[/url] should give you additional assistance.
_________________

___________________________________________________________________
For what are we born if not to aid one another?
-- Ernest Hemingway

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 24 Feb 2018
Posts: 19
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2018, 23:05
It was kind of tough to understand the usage of past perfect 'had reduced'.
OG says: 'had reduced' would make the temporal relationships somewhat clearer than does the past tense 'reduced'.
This explanation is quite different from what I understood.

My understanding is:

Time point 1 :Around 1900(more than 17m pounds)
----Overfishing & proliferation of ~ kept reducing landings----
Time point 2: 1920(less than 4m pounds)

So at time point2 (1920), it would've been 'have reduced'
But time point 2 is a past time, so it should be 'had reduced'
That's what I understood.

Can somebody point out what I understood wrong and what OG is exactly trying to explain?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Apr 2018
Posts: 3
CAT Tests
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2018, 00:01
EducationAisle wrote:
SamuelWitwicky wrote:
So basically, this fisherman question, like the honeybee question, is merely stating facts ("narration" as Ron called it) - that at 1900, this was the scenario, then fastforward 20 years later, 1st event (i.e. overfishing +building) happened and resulted in another scenario. Same for the honeybee, after their release, then the first event (i.e. migration) happened. Therefore, this is the exception to the past perfect>>past tense rule.

Yes, while daagh has already explained it with an official example, another GMATPrep sentence that comes to mind:

In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly
six hours a week
.

There are actually 3 events that this sentence talks about:

(a) children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores (1981)

(b) 16 years passing since then (between 1981 and 1997)

(c) But, before those 16 years passed (within those years, as indicated by the words by 1997), that figure (two and a half hours a week doing household chores) went up to 6 hours.

However, while (b) and (c) both happened in the past, (c) happened before (b) and hence, (c) should be in past perfect (in this case: had grown). In fact, this is a classical usage of Past Perfect.

Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses this concept of Past perfect tense, its application and examples in significant detail. In the book, we have provided a similar example:

In 2007, a typical web user spent less than 4 hours a month on Facebook; by 2011, that figure had gone up to 8 hours.

If someone is interested, PM me your email-id, I can mail the corresponding section of the book.



Thanks EducationAisle for the book.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than &nbs [#permalink] 01 Aug 2018, 00:01

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 41 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Around 1900, fishermen in the Chesapeake Bay area landed more than

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


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®.