GMAT Ninja Verbal Wednesdays, LIVE on YouTube -- ask your Qs here!

Thank you for pointing that out sire. I don't fundamentally doubt my understanding but wasn't able to solve those 4. Your last sentence made my life better than before
Thank you very much sensie.
Have a good day !!

a. Two million pounds were spent for the construction of this dam.
b. Two million pounds was spent for the construction of this dam.

Which of the above sentences is correct?

Please help me...



_________________

Hi gmatbusters,

Statement 1: Two million pounds were --> here the subject becomes "individual pound currency notes". This is nonsensical because you had spent the amount and not notes.

So statement 2 should be correct, because the implicit meaning is "the amount was spent on construction".

Hope that helps.

Regards

GMATNinja, souvik101990,

Not sure about others but I surely am missing fun and happenings here!!
Eagerly waiting for the next session!
_________________

adkikani

You can watch previous sessions here https://gmatclub.com/forum/verbal-live- ... l#p1936104

We'll be back with a new series of eight live videos, beginning on Wednesday, February 14 at 9:30 a.m. Pacific time.

For details and an updated schedule, please visit this thread: https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-ninja-w ... 59122.html.

See you all on YouTube!
_________________

Welcome back GMATNinja and congrats for the new baby

Looking forward to the new series

Can’t believe we are restarting verbal livestreams on Valentine’s Day. For all you GMAT lovers - brace yourselves.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Congrats Charles for the addition of a new member in your family.
And I am very eager to re-join your sessions. Looking forward to Valentines Day !!

Thank you for the kind words, NDND & gmatexam439! Looking forward to tormenting all of you on V-Day!
_________________

Not currently. We don’t have this running currently.

Thanks,
BB

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Hi GMATNinja,

Question about your reasoning of "Springfield Fire Commissioner" in your GMAT Critical Reasoning #2 LIVE w/GMAT Ninja: Beyond Strengthen, Weaken, & Assumption Questions (@approx. 10min mark):

Wouldn't E also strengthen? If, on any given day, a significant % of public telephones are out of service, this means that people cannot use them. Therefore, the removal of telephone boxes won't "hamper people's ability to report a file". It seems to reinforce the conclusion.

Thanks for your video. It is a great help!

On your video of Verbal Q& A and knowledge regarding some aspects,
Like this is a retired OG Question but this requires a knowledge of Radar and Radar Detectors and their usage with Speed tickets, in our part of the world, there are speeding cameras and no radar, (it's not called the same I guess) but I been lucky to visit another part of the world where the people call it radar so I could answer the CR, but I believe if like doesn't know what radars are and relation to speeding tickets, this will take an extra 30-40 seconds to comprehend. what do you say GMATNinja

https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-recent-rep ... 86145.html

A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?


(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.

(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.

(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.

(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.

(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.

I’m sorry, but what is your question? What specifically could one answer? It sounds like you are raising a valid cultural point about questions not taking some of the local differences into consideration but I’m not sure if it’s any more than just venting based on what I’m reading
…. I guess you can lodge a complaint with the GMAC 😎





Posted from my mobile device
_________________

This look really interesting! Anyways i was planning to know about TOFL looks a prefect platform to begin with...........

Hello GMAT Ninja team and Charles,

I wanted to understand when doing parallelism questions. how do we know from where we need to look at the antecedent.

for example if there is a sentence that goes xyz....noun phrase.....verb phrase.....noun phrase and verb phrase....., how do we know the "and" was refering to the verb phrase and not the "noun phrase", or since they are placing noun phrase with verb phrase the option should be wrong.

Basically how far back in the sentence we need to check to know if the parallelism rule has been violated or respected.

Whatever comes after the "and" will determine what you're looking for earlier in the sentence. If, for instance, a sentence starts with, "On Thursdays Tim likes to go for a run and..." there's no way for me to know what should come next. None.

I could see a full clause, "On Thursdays Tim likes to go for a run, and on Fridays he swims in a lake."

I could see a verb phrase, "On Thursdays Tim likes to go for a run and then cooks three omelettes."

Both are fine. There's no way for me to know I'm looking for a parallel construction until I get to the "and." Once I do, I want to pay attention to the portion in red and then let my eyes drift back to the left in search of the same grammatical component in blue. A clause in the first sentence. A verb phrase in the second. (The example you listed is more like the second sentence above, since a verb phrase follows the "and.")

Once I see the two parallel elements, I'll ask myself if it's a logical pairing. If it is, great. The parallelism is fine, and I'm on to other issues. If it isn't logical, the option is out.

The takeaway: you're not expected to read minds! The only way to figure out what portions should be parallel is to note what comes after the "and," and then work your way back until you find something playing a similar role. And while there's no rule that limits how far back you can look for this element, the harder it is to find the parallel piece, the more likely it is that there's another answer choice that's clearer and less confusing.

For more on parallelism, check out this older live video or this newer parallelism video (and its sequels).

I hope that helps!
_________________