It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 20:14

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being

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

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1481

Kudos [?]: 1500 [1], given: 2

Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2009, 11:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

60% (01:00) correct 40% (01:09) wrong based on 604 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

198. Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year sixteen buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.

(A) one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings


Last edited by abhimahna on 19 Mar 2017, 01:51, edited 1 time in total.
Added OA

Kudos [?]: 1500 [1], given: 2

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
Posts: 300

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 6

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2009, 11:20
Scientists calculate that a human being will be struck, not should be struck. This leaves all but C and D.

I will go with D even though it uses the passive voice because it is most parallel to the un-underlined portion of the sentence.

"Each year buildings can be expected to sustain damage."
"Every 9 years a human will be struck by a meteorite."

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 195

Kudos [?]: 547 [0], given: 6

Location: Manchester UK
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2009, 14:05
i still cant get why SHOULD is wrong?

Kudos [?]: 547 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2009
Posts: 221

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 13

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2009, 20:52
sagarsabnis wrote:
i still cant get why SHOULD is wrong?


SHOULD is usually used for moral obligation. Usage of SHOULD is way off in this sentence.

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 13

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2008
Posts: 157

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 39

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2009, 22:10
IMO D, it is expected/calculated not 100 sure so should is inappropriate here.

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 39

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Posts: 42

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Nov 2009, 04:08
noboru wrote:
198. Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year sixteen buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.

(A) one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite


I chose D here as my answer. I disagree that "should" should be used here. We already know that there's uncertainty because the sentence is referring to what the Canadian scientists have calculated. The use of "should" also implies that the meteorite has the purpose of striking human beings, whereas option D makes the strike on humans to look more random. And because this is a prediction, the use of "will" is appropriate.

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

SVP
SVP
avatar
Status: Graduated
Affiliations: HEC
Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Posts: 1635

Kudos [?]: 688 [0], given: 432

Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V44
Premium Member
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2009, 12:30
D is correct. "Should" can only be used for obligations, not for probability. This immediately disqualifies options A, B, and E. For C, the phrase should read "once every nine years."
_________________

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 688 [0], given: 432

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 208

Kudos [?]: 87 [1], given: 2

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Dec 2009, 19:08
1
This post received
KUDOS
'should' is strong - hence eliminate A, B, E (generally we should avoid strong/extreme words in GMAT)
In C 'once' and 'every' are redundant

Hence, D - perfect
_________________

I do not suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.

Kudos [?]: 87 [1], given: 2

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 269

Kudos [?]: 278 [1], given: 25

Location: India
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 May 2010, 10:30
1
This post received
KUDOS
noboru wrote:
198. Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year sixteen buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.

(A) one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite


1. should is used for liability.
2. a human being is better than one human being because one is very precise as if they are sure exactly one man will be hit. a human being means more like as if on an average one man will be struck
3. will be struck is parallel with can be expected.

So only D left.
_________________

Cheers,
SD

Kudos [?]: 278 [1], given: 25

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 416

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 112

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2010, 23:33
The source is 1000 series ...
The answer should be D ..
Comparison ..between two points of time ...every nine year ..and each year....So that leaves D and E ..... I prefer will over Should as we are predicting something !!

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 112

5 KUDOS received
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 347

Kudos [?]: 1682 [5], given: 11

Location: San Francisco
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2010, 14:06
5
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hey All,

I think they're playing with how you can use "should." I can say "Based on my calculations, the eclipse should occur in summer 2011." But when we leave out that "based on my calculations" part, it gets confusing.

A) This sounds like the same ONE person will get hit by the meteorite (poor guy!).

B) "once in every nine years" is not a saying. You can say "once every nine years", but you can't have that "in".

C) still sounds like the same one guy, with added weirdness.

D) sounds good.

E) Does sound like a recommendation for this poor man.

Hope that helps!

-t
_________________


Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 1682 [5], given: 11

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 3

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2010, 15:36
Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year sixteen buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.


(A) one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite


one can easily eliminate the answer options with should as the meteorite strikin the human bein is in no way mandatory..
it is a mere prediction and hence , only will can be used..
among the 2 options havin will.. D sounds good ..plus is idiomatic

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 151

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 15

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2010, 18:09
I do not quite agree that will is correct. Personally neither -- should or will -- sound correct to me. Do not have any exact reasoning though. Just does not sound right.

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 15

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 230 [0], given: 5

Location: Boston
Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 17:41
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year 16 buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.

(A) one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite

[Reveal] Spoiler:
I disagree with the OA. The OA is (D), and the explanation is: "What this sentence says is not what it logically intends. The verb should implies obligation; in this sentence, it indicates that one human being ought to be struck every nine years, as though that person somehow deserved it. The scientists clearly mean that a human being will be struck by a meteorite roughly every nine years." I understand this logic, but completely disagree with it. First of all, "should" does not necessarily imply obligation. It can also refer to something that is expected but not definite - "If the scientists are correct, this should happen." That's in the dictionary. Secondly, by changing it to "WILL be struck," you are changing the meaning of the sentence to state that the scientists know, without a doubt, that someone will be struck by a meteorite every nine years. However, the second part of the sentence, "while each year 16 buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects," makes it clear that the scientists do not KNOW that these are definite things, but rather that they are EXPECTED things. "Should" is the correct word to use. You could replace it with some other things, like "will probably" or "most likely will", but not just "will". That changes the inherent meaning to something more definite than actually intended.

Thoughts?

Kudos [?]: 230 [0], given: 5

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 171

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 25

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 20:38
I use POE and went with D.

Use of 'one human being' is awkward. So we can eliminate A & C.

Next I looked for some kind of parallelism.
Canadian scientists have calculated that every nine years...........while each year.....

We are left with D & E.
'will be struck' is correct compared to 'should be struck'

So D.
_________________

Give [highlight]KUDOS [/highlight] if you like my post.

Always do things which make you feel ALIVE!!!

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 25

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Time to step up the tempo
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 404

Kudos [?]: 259 [0], given: 50

Location: Milky way
Schools: ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 21:21
I went with option D. Narrowed down on C and D. In option C - "will strike one human being" sounded strange.

'should' sounds like there is an obligation for the meteorite. 'will' sounded just right for me.
_________________

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

Kudos [?]: 259 [0], given: 50

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Upset about the verbal score - SC, CR and RC are going to be my friend
Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 316

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 22:05
D

Scientists are predicting something => will provides better choice than should
C & D alone has this construct
C has => once in every nine years - redundant.
_________________

My gmat story
MGMAT1 - 630 Q44V32
MGMAT2 - 650 Q41V38
MGMAT3 - 680 Q44V37
GMATPrep1 - 660 Q49V31
Knewton1 - 550 Q40V27

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

1 KUDOS received
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 184

Kudos [?]: 270 [1], given: 7

Schools: MBA, Thunderbird School of Global Management / BA, Wesleyan University
Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 22:30
1
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
TehJay,
This is one of those SC areas where our ear leads us astray. We hear people say things like "If my calculations are correct, we should arrive 10 minutes early." In GMAT world, however, "should" implies obligation and can't be used to express probability. This is one of those idiomatic things you just have to memorize, but I think the more important issue with this problem is the split that allows you to narrow your choices down to D and E.
Great debate on this one!
Brett
_________________


Brett Beach-Kimball | Manhattan GMAT Instructor

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 270 [1], given: 7

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 181

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 11

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 23:24
the ans is D
TehJay wrote:
Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being should be struck every nine years by a meteorite, while each year 16 buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects.

(A)
(B) a human being should be struck by a meteorite once in every nine years
(C) a meteorite will strike one human being once in every nine years
(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite
(E) every nine years a human being should be struck by a meteorite



as discussed will be is preferred over should be as should be sounds like obligation

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 11

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 May 2010
Posts: 7

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2010, 23:37
Also looking at the structure of the second part of the question "each year 16 buildings can be expected to sustain damage from such objects" , the option

(D) every nine years a human being will be struck by a meteorite

is structurally similar.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being   [#permalink] 29 Sep 2010, 23:37

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 52 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Canadian scientists have calculated that one human being

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.