Data collected from various sources indicate that in any given year, 2

Question

Data collected from various sources indicate that  in any given year, 2000 people should be struck by lightning , while approximately 30% of those struck will die.

(A) in any given year, 2000 people should be struck by lightning 
 (B) 2000 people should be struck by lightning in any given year 
 (C) lightning will strike human beings 2000 times per year 
 (D) each year, 2000 people will be struck by lightning 
 (E) each year, lightning should strike 2000 times

KyleWiddison · Accepted Answer

This is a pretty good meaning-based question. Given the number of people who were thrown by "should" I will expand a bit on it. While "should" is used for 'future' conditions it brings an implication of obligation or duty. From a logical standpoint it does not make sense to say that 2000 people are obligated or have a duty to be struck by lightning each year. "Will" is future tense and implies certianty, but the language of the sentence softens that certainly because we are talking about the average from "various sources" and that it would happen "in any given year".

KW

KW

pqhai · Answer

Data collected from various sources indicate that  in any given year, 2000 people should be struck by lightning , while approximately 30% of those struck will die.

(A) in any given year, 2000 people should be struck by lightning 
  Wrong.   why we need a comma before "2000 people"? The sentence should not have a comma which is used to separate two parts of the sentence.

(B) 2000 people should be struck by lightning in any given year 
  Correct.   "should" is used correctly. The sentence is concise.

(C) lightning will strike human beings 2000 times per year 
  Wrong.   
- "will" is not correct. We can't use "will" if the forecasting is not 100% sure.
- "strike 2000 times"# 2000 people --> changes the meaning.

(D) each year, 2000 people will be struck by lightning 
  Wrong.   "will" is not correct.

(E) each year, lightning should strike 2000 times
  Wrong.   "strike 2000 times"# 2000 people --> changes the meaning.

Waiting for OA.

pqhai · Answer

Welcome to gmatclub

Could you please elaborate your answer?

gmatter0913 · Answer

My thought process was:

There is a "those" in the non-underlined part of the sentence. Hence, it has to refer to people or human beings. E doesn't have an antecedent. E is wrong.

A and D have non-essential modifers. So, if I just assume that the modifier is not there, the sentences don't seem correct

A says: Data collected from various sources indicate that in any given year while approximately... (no verb in the that clause and the sentence is awkward)

D says: Data collected from various sources indicate that each year while approximately... (no verb in the that clause and the sentence is awkward)

So, A, D, and E are out. B is passive and long.
Coming to option C, even though I thought about the sentence changing its meaning "strikes human beings 2000 times a year", I felt it is fine in the rush of the exam.

Hence, I went with the option C.

gmatter0913 · Answer

To my surprise, the OA is D. But if I remove the non-essential modifier the sentence seems awfully wrong. Any help on how D can be correct in such cases.

Is the process of removing the non-essential modifier and thinking about the sentence a wrong approach?

gmatter0913 · Answer

The OA explanation is as below:

The main error in the original sentence is the usage of the word "should." Such usage (equating "should" with "will") is common colloquially, but on the GMAT, "should" always implies "ought to." Applying the correct usage, the sentence would read that 2000 people "ought to" be struck by lightning in a given year. This error needs to be corrected.

Choices (A), (B), and (E) use "should," while choices (C) and (D) replace it with "will."

Choices (A), (B) and (E) are out because of the "should" usage error.

Choice (C) changes the sentence’s meaning by moving the modifier "2000" from its proper place in front of "people" to a different location, in front of "times," changing its function and altering the meaning of the sentence.

gmatter0913 · Answer

Hi Kyle,

Could you provide your expert comments on the below?

KyleWiddison · Answer

Sure thing. First, can you confirm that all the punctuation marks (commas really) in your post match the punctuation from the source?

KW

Posted from my mobile device

gmatter0913 · Answer

Kyle,

Yes, the punctuation for the question and the answer options is correct.

shailendrasharma · Answer

In addition, I believe for logical predication - "each year" is better (as in choice D) rather than "in any given year" (as in choice A) -- "in any given year" is a good phrase in phrases that talks about probability (X has 1% probability in any given year), but in certainty cases "each year" is good. Am I right ? Please comment.

gmatter0913 · Answer

Hi Kyle,

Could you help me on the below? (The punctuation is correct.)

KyleWiddison · Answer

Sorry gmatter, for some reason I haven't been getting reply notifications in my email. I was surprised that you hadn't responded, but when I checked the thread to see what was happening you had responded twice

I asked you about the punctuation because if I were writing the sentence I would put a comma after "that" and here's why. The core of the sentence in the original is as follows: Data ... indicate (main independent clause) that 2000 people should be struck (subordinate, dependent clause). The information "in any given year" is part of a non-essential prepositional phrase and you would typically see those independent clauses set off by commas (one in front and one in back). Perhaps the test writer was uncomfortable having a comma directly after the "that", which I guess I can understand, but I would then expect to see the second comma (the one after "year") ommitted as well. To answer your question about non-essential modifiers, I completely support the practice of removing the non-essential stuff to understand the core of the sentence (I did that here in my explanation). The challenge on this question is that the commas make you believe that a core part of the sentence - "2000 people should be struck" - is actually non-essential because it appears to be set off by commas. Don't stop the practice of looking at the core (momentarily ignoring the non-essential pieces of the sentence) - just recognize that this question doesn't fit the mold. Again, sorry for the delayed response. KW

KyleWiddison · Answer

If I'm being honest (and I am

), I probably like the phrase "in any given year" on this problem, even though it's not used in the "correct" answer. The data from the question deal with averages, so the actual number of people struck each year will vary. "In any given year" gives the sense that we are talking about averages while "each year" makes you think that at least (or potentially exactly) 2000 people will be struck each and every year, without exception. From the standpoint of SC, I guess you could argue that the meanings are essentially the same and "every year" is more concise, but given the GMAT's renewed focus on Meaning, I would caution you to take seriously the meaning differences of phrases like this when you are taking the GMAT. KW

rohitkumar77 · Answer

Isnt indicate a bossy verb here ? and according to the rule isnt it bossy verb + that + Subject + Command subjective !! 
then how can we place each year before 2000 students .

sayantanc2k · Answer

The OA is correct and explanations provided in the thread appear sufficient. If there are any specific questions, please post them here and then click again on the "Request Expert Reply" button – closing this request.

MikeScarn · Answer

For me, it came down to option (C) or (D).

(C) lightning will strike human beings 2000 times per year 
(D) each year, 2000 people will be  struck  by lightning

Both of these looked good to me, but I ended up going with (D) because it uses " struck ", which is used again in the latter part of the sentence.

Does anybody have another reason that (C) is incorrect?

How to eliminate (A), (B), and (E)? 
Kyle from Manhattan explains the "should" vs "will" element of this question. I'll quote him: "While "should" is used for 'future' conditions it brings an implication of obligation or duty. From a logical standpoint it does not make sense to say that 2000 people are obligated or have a duty to be struck by lightning each year. "Will" is future tense and implies certainty, but the language of the sentence softens that certainly because we are talking about the average from "various sources" and that it would happen "in any given year"."

Md231 · Answer

The catch lies in the last part of the sentence "...will die". Hence, the underlined part requires a "will + verb". So it's between C and D.
C has an awkward meaning suggesting that human beings will be struck those many times rather than the intended meaning that those many human being will be struck.
D for me.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Data collected from various sources indicate that in any given year, 2

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

Data collected from various sources indicate that in any given year, 2

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards