Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
ChiranjeevSingh
Expert
Tutor
Expert reply
31 Oct 2020, 01:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
Here's the official explanation provided by the GMAC for this question:
Although the original version of this sentence is poorly worded, one can tell that it is intended to express a contrast between vehicles burning fuels that are more polluting and vehicles burning fuels that are less polluting. The contrast could be expressed in several different ways, but in any of them, the categories that are contrasted should be parallel to make the comparison clear and coherent. The nonunderlined portion of the sentence expresses the first part of the contrast in terms of how much pollution vehicles powered by natural gas emit. For the contrast to be logical and coherent, the second part should refer to how much pollution vehicles fueled in some other way emit. Answer choices B and D use the word fewer instead of less. Fewer indicates a difference in number, not in amount. In principle, the author could intend to refer to a difference in the number of pollutants, but if that were the case, it would make better sense to say simply fewer pollutants or to tell what category certain refers to, for example fewer types of volatile organic pollutants.
Option A: This illogically contrasts what certain vehicles emit with what the burning of certain types of fuel emits.
Option B: With the word fewer, this incoherently contrasts the numbers of certain pollutants emitted rather than the amounts. Burning gasoline and diesel fuel could be a single, complex subject, in which case, the plural verb do would be incorrect; it should be does. Alternatively, do may be intended to have burning gasoline and burning diesel fuel as two subjects, where burning functions as an adjective. Even with that interpretation, though, the verb should be singular because the two burning fuels are joined by or, not and. Either way, the comparison between vehicles and burning fuels is illogical.
Option C: This is ambiguous. Given the structure of this wording, it could have either of two nonsensical meanings: vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than gasoline and diesel fuel emit, or the amount of certain pollutants emitted by such vehicles is less than the amount of gasoline or diesel fuel emitted by such vehicles.
Option D: With the word fewer, this incoherently contrasts the numbers of certain pollutants emitted rather than the amounts. It also illogically contrasts what certain vehicles emit with what burning certain types of fuel emits.
Option E: Correct. This correctly uses the word less, indicating that the difference is in the amount, not the number, of pollutants. It also draws a logically coherent contrast between the amount that some vehicles emit and the amount that other vehicles emit.
The correct answer is E.
Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.
Although the original version of this sentence is poorly worded, one can tell that it is intended to express a contrast between vehicles burning fuels that are more polluting and vehicles burning fuels that are less polluting. The contrast could be expressed in several different ways, but in any of them, the categories that are contrasted should be parallel to make the comparison clear and coherent. The nonunderlined portion of the sentence expresses the first part of the contrast in terms of how much pollution vehicles powered by natural gas emit. For the contrast to be logical and coherent, the second part should refer to how much pollution vehicles fueled in some other way emit. Answer choices B and D use the word fewer instead of less. Fewer indicates a difference in number, not in amount. In principle, the author could intend to refer to a difference in the number of pollutants, but if that were the case, it would make better sense to say simply fewer pollutants or to tell what category certain refers to, for example fewer types of volatile organic pollutants.
Option A: This illogically contrasts what certain vehicles emit with what the burning of certain types of fuel emits.
Option B: With the word fewer, this incoherently contrasts the numbers of certain pollutants emitted rather than the amounts. Burning gasoline and diesel fuel could be a single, complex subject, in which case, the plural verb do would be incorrect; it should be does. Alternatively, do may be intended to have burning gasoline and burning diesel fuel as two subjects, where burning functions as an adjective. Even with that interpretation, though, the verb should be singular because the two burning fuels are joined by or, not and. Either way, the comparison between vehicles and burning fuels is illogical.
Option C: This is ambiguous. Given the structure of this wording, it could have either of two nonsensical meanings: vehicles powered by natural gas emit less of certain pollutants than gasoline and diesel fuel emit, or the amount of certain pollutants emitted by such vehicles is less than the amount of gasoline or diesel fuel emitted by such vehicles.
Option D: With the word fewer, this incoherently contrasts the numbers of certain pollutants emitted rather than the amounts. It also illogically contrasts what certain vehicles emit with what burning certain types of fuel emits.
Option E: Correct. This correctly uses the word less, indicating that the difference is in the amount, not the number, of pollutants. It also draws a logically coherent contrast between the amount that some vehicles emit and the amount that other vehicles emit.
The correct answer is E.
Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.
02 Nov 2021, 00:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
seofah
(A) less of certain pollutants than the burning of gasoline or diesel fuel
comparison isn't right since the pollutants and the cars emmitting them are compared clearly not the intended meaning therefore out
(B) fewer of certain pollutants than burning gasoline or diesel fuel do
fewer is used for numbers and do in the end idn't conveying the right meaning therefore out
(C) less of certain pollutants than gasoline or diesel fuel
The comparison should be between the emiision gases by different vechiles which is not the case therefore out
(D) fewer of certain pollutants than does burning gasoline or diesel fuel
The comparison is off and fewer isn't the right usage therefore out
(E) less of certain pollutants than those burning gasoline or diesel fuel
THe meaning and comparison is perfect therefore let us hang on to it
THerefore IMO E
