Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 07:20 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 07:20
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
605-655 Level|   Verb Tense/Form|                        
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 26 Dec 2021, 11:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sk567
Hi

Can anyone point out how the use of 'would' is correct in this sentence? I think 'will continue' should be correct.

Here is my understanding:

Would is used to express uncertaininty/ expectations about the future/ hypothetical condition/ assumption. The announcement does not fall in any of these categories. Please guide.
Show more

WOULD has a few uses:

PRESENT CONDITIONAL:

"If X [past tense], Y WOULD [happen]."

But 'would' is also used for expressing what the future looked like from the past's POV.

"He told me he would arrive on time, but as usual, he was late."

That's how it is used here.
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,765
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,765
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water Updated on: 22 Apr 2022, 06:26
Originally posted by ExpertsGlobal5 on 30 Dec 2021, 06:58.
Last edited by ExpertsGlobal5 on 22 Apr 2022, 06:26, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sk567
Hi

Can anyone point out how the use of 'would' is correct in this sentence? I think 'will continue' should be correct.

Here is my understanding:

Would is used to express uncertaininty/ expectations about the future/ hypothetical condition/ assumption. The announcement does not fall in any of these categories. Please guide.
Show more

Hello @Sk567,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, "would" is used to refer to hypotheticals, but it is also used to refer to a past action from a point in time further in the past; for example, "When I left, I did not realize I would be late."

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Arthurito
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2022
Last visit: 16 Nov 2022
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
11
Given Kudos: 42
Posts: 41
Kudos: 11
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 26 May 2022, 07:38
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Cant we say that A is correct as the sequencing is already done by the time market 'the day before' so there is no need for past perfect tense ?
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 26 May 2022, 09:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Arthurito
Cant we say that A is correct as the sequencing is already done by the time market 'the day before' so there is no need for past perfect tense ?
Show more
Well, the non-underlined portion does use a past perfect "had fallen" despite the timer marker "the day before".

Since no appreciable increase in the level of the river happened before the announcement, this is appropriately expressed as past perfect in option D.
User avatar
Pankaj0901
User avatar
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Last visit: 17 Dec 2022
Posts: 419
Own Kudos:
51
Given Kudos: 737
Location: India
WE:Account Management (Hospitality and Tourism)
Posts: 419
Kudos: 51
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 07 Jun 2022, 01:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi AndrewN - I have gone through the explanations and have a slight doubt on the concept of past perfect: between the options A, which doesn't use PAST PERFECT for RESULTED, and D, which uses PAST PERFECT "HAD RESULTED". I understand that among the 3 events, the first two events will take PAST PERFECT and the latest event SIMPLE PAST. Perfect!

The correct answer
Quote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.
Show more

The three events in order of their occurances are:
1. fallen
2. resulted
3. announced

Between the 2nd event "resulted" and third event "announced", isn't the sequence well understood and implied that the "announcement" happened after the "result"? And, in such cases whenever sequence is implied, we don't need to use PAST PERFECT? So, why "HAD" resulted? Option A stands as it is without any confusions or ambiguity in the sequence of events, and shouldn't it be the correct answer?

Now, let's please consider the below sentence (I just trimmed the later part for the sake of understanding)
Quote:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted.
Show more
Is this correct?

I think what I am fundamentally asking is, when events are wrapped under the statement spoken or described, we go to one level past for the events that are wrapped under the statement, as a general rule. (No questions on this - Please correct me if I am wrong.) This seems to me the ACTUAL REASON why OPTION A is not correct and Option D is correct in the given question. And, NOT the reason as explained by others in this thread that there are three events, whose sequence in order to be defined we must have PAST PERFECT for the second event. I seem to be mixing a few things here and there. It would be great if you can please once point me to the right direction.

Thanks in advance!
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,765
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,765
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 07 Jun 2022, 04:31
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pankaj0901
Hi AndrewN - I have gone through the explanations and have a slight doubt on the concept of past perfect: between the options A, which doesn't use PAST PERFECT for RESULTED, and D, which uses PAST PERFECT "HAD RESULTED". I understand that among the 3 events, the first two events will take PAST PERFECT and the latest event SIMPLE PAST. Perfect!

The correct answer
Quote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

The three events in order of their occurances are:
1. fallen
2. resulted
3. announced

Between the 2nd event "resulted" and third event "announced", isn't the sequence well understood and implied that the "announcement" happened after the "result"? And, in such cases whenever sequence is implied, we don't need to use PAST PERFECT? So, why "HAD" resulted? Option A stands as it is without any confusions or ambiguity in the sequence of events, and shouldn't it be the correct answer?

Now, let's please consider the below sentence (I just trimmed the later part for the sake of understanding)
Quote:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted.
Is this correct?

I think what I am fundamentally asking is, when events are wrapped under the statement spoken or described, we go to one level past for the events that are wrapped under the statement, as a general rule. (No questions on this - Please correct me if I am wrong.) This seems to me the ACTUAL REASON why OPTION A is not correct and Option D is correct in the given question. And, NOT the reason as explained by others in this thread that there are three events, whose sequence in order to be defined we must have PAST PERFECT for the second event. I seem to be mixing a few things here and there. It would be great if you can please once point me to the right direction.

Thanks in advance!
Show more

Hello Pankaj0901,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, the use of the past perfect tense becomes unnecessary only when the chronology is clear because of terms such as "before/after/when/earlier/later"…or because of clear mention of dates or times; if the chronology is made clear by some other method, past perfect tense is still required.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,511
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,511
 [1]
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 07 Jun 2022, 05:34
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pankaj0901
Hi AndrewN - I have gone through the explanations and have a slight doubt on the concept of past perfect: between the options A, which doesn't use PAST PERFECT for RESULTED, and D, which uses PAST PERFECT "HAD RESULTED". I understand that among the 3 events, the first two events will take PAST PERFECT and the latest event SIMPLE PAST. Perfect!

The correct answer
Quote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

The three events in order of their occurances are:
1. fallen
2. resulted
3. announced

Between the 2nd event "resulted" and third event "announced", isn't the sequence well understood and implied that the "announcement" happened after the "result"? And, in such cases whenever sequence is implied, we don't need to use PAST PERFECT? So, why "HAD" resulted? Option A stands as it is without any confusions or ambiguity in the sequence of events, and shouldn't it be the correct answer?

Now, let's please consider the below sentence (I just trimmed the later part for the sake of understanding)
Quote:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river HAD resulted.
Is this correct?

I think what I am fundamentally asking is, when events are wrapped under the statement spoken or described, we go to one level past for the events that are wrapped under the statement, as a general rule. (No questions on this - Please correct me if I am wrong.) This seems to me the ACTUAL REASON why OPTION A is not correct and Option D is correct in the given question. And, NOT the reason as explained by others in this thread that there are three events, whose sequence in order to be defined we must have PAST PERFECT for the second event. I seem to be mixing a few things here and there. It would be great if you can please once point me to the right direction.

Thanks in advance!
Show more
I agree with you in principle, Pankaj0901. In a sentence with two verbs to consider, the past perfect might be optional. However, this one would be a bit jarring, because we have three verbs to consider, two of which are fixed—i.e. we cannot negotiate announced or had fallen—and there is a sort of tug-of-war between simple past and past perfect in that second verb, resulted or had resulted. Using the simple past resulted would beg the question, Why, since there were two other events that occurred at a prior time to the announcement, does only one receive "special" or "understood" treatment? Remember, our goal is to play it safe with SC, to select an answer that clearly conveys the vital meaning of the given sentence. So, rather than approach the issue from the angle that something might be possible, it would be more useful to ask which option between (A) and (D) is safer? I cannot object to the meaning conveyed by (D), whereas the original sentence, specifically its logical predication (simple past-simple past-past perfect), is open to debate.

Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
User avatar
Gio96
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2021
Last visit: 01 Apr 2025
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
7
Given Kudos: 56
Posts: 36
Kudos: 7
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 22 Jun 2022, 01:12
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi team,

I'm quite confused about choice A. While I agree that the adjective "appreciative" makes the sentence wrong I can't clearly understand why the past simple is not appropriate here.

As someone said, when we have a sequence marker (such as, after, before...) we can omit the past perfect since the sequence marker makes the sentence clear. Here we have the word "because" that express a cause-effect, so clearly we can understand that the cause becomes before the effect (Because no increase, Gov announced). So I structured the question in the following way:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue
because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers
that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

Could someone help me understanding if I'm missing something?

Regards.
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [1]
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 22 Jun 2022, 01:56
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Gio96
Hi team,

I'm quite confused about choice A. While I agree that the adjective "appreciative" makes the sentence wrong I can't clearly understand why the past simple is not appropriate here.

As someone said, when we have a sequence marker (such as, after, before...) we can omit the past perfect since the sequence marker makes the sentence clear. Here we have the word "because" that express a cause-effect, so clearly we can understand that the cause becomes before the effect (Because no increase, Gov announced). So I structured the question in the following way:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue
because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers
that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

Could someone help me understanding if I'm missing something?
Show more
Would suggest that you continue to give preference to an option that does use "past perfect" even when some sequence marker is present (of course assuming that the option is correct in all other respects).

Another sentence that uses past perfect, despite the usage of sequence marker "before":

The personal income tax did not become permanent in the United States until the First World War; before that time the federal government had depended on tariffs as its main source of revenue.

In fact, there are numerous such official sentences.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [1]
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 22 Jun 2022, 16:04
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Gio96
Hi team,

I'm quite confused about choice A. While I agree that the adjective "appreciative" makes the sentence wrong I can't clearly understand why the past simple is not appropriate here.

As someone said, when we have a sequence marker (such as, after, before...) we can omit the past perfect since the sequence marker makes the sentence clear. Here we have the word "because" that express a cause-effect, so clearly we can understand that the cause becomes before the effect (Because no increase, Gov announced). So I structured the question in the following way:

Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue
because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers
that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

Could someone help me understanding if I'm missing something?

Regards.
Show more
The main reason to use past perfect here is to clarify that the "resulted" action happened before the "announced" action. (For more on that, check out this post.) Just because the past perfect isn't strictly necessary doesn't mean that it can't be used to help the reader keep the timeline straight.

Is the simple past ("resulted") wrong in (A)? Probably not. But between that and the incorrect usage of "appreciative" (which means "showing gratitude"), (D) is the better option.

I hope that helps a bit!
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 22 Oct 2022, 15:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

(A) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river
(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that
(C) the use of water would continue to be restricted because not any appreciable increase in the river's level had
(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had
(E) using water would continue being restricted because not any appreciable increase in the level of the river
Show more
Hi Experts,
Can you help me to decide 'river's level' vs 'level of the river', please? What's the difference between these 2 things?
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
 [1]
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
 [1]
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 23 Oct 2022, 09:14
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheUltimateWinner
Quote:
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

(A) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river
(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that
(C) the use of water would continue to be restricted because not any appreciable increase in the river's level had
(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had
(E) using water would continue being restricted because not any appreciable increase in the level of the river
Hi Experts,
Can you help me to decide 'river's level' vs 'level of the river', please? What's the difference between these 2 things?
Show more

It's super subtle... And I might even go so far as to say "Pick whichever."

But "Level of the river" is the level to which the river rose. It's 'how high' the river rose.

"River's level" is the level that the river *has*. It is a possession of the river. As if, the level to which the river reaches is something that *belongs* to the river. Of these two, I prefer "level of the river," but it's hard to say why. Like, take a similar issue:

"The height of the building impressed travellers approaching the city from the south."

"The building's height impressed travellers approaching the city from the south."

I have no issue with either of these. So I also don't have much issue with "river's level."
User avatar
Jayadeepan
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2021
Last visit: 13 Jun 2025
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 7
Status:Field Engineer - Reliability (O&G)
Location: India
Schools: Oxford Said'25 (A) Imperial'25 (D) NUS '26 (II) ESADE (A) ISB '25 (A) Rotterdam'25 (A) HEC Jan'24 Intake (D) Anderson '26
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.8
WE:Engineering (Energy)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Oxford Said'25 (A) Imperial'25 (D) NUS '26 (II) ESADE (A) ISB '25 (A) Rotterdam'25 (A) HEC Jan'24 Intake (D) Anderson '26
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
Posts: 3
Kudos: 5
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 18 Dec 2022, 01:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
JarvisR
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.

(A) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river

(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that

(C) the use of water would continue to be restricted because not any appreciable increase in the river's level had

(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had

(E) using water would continue being restricted because not any appreciable increase in the level of the river

SC02333

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning is that restrictions on the use of water would continue because a significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Tenses + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• The past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past".
• The simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.
• "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun.

A: Trap. This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "appreciative increase"; the use of "appreciative" illogically implies that a grateful increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers; the intended meaning is that a significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring; please remember, the past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past", and the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past.

B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "appreciative increase"; the use of "appreciative" illogically implies that a grateful increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers; the intended meaning is that a significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option B uses the needlessly indirect phrase "restricting the use of water" and the passive voice construction "there had not been any", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "not + any + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river; please remember, "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun. Further, Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase "the use of water would continue to be restricted", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "appreciable increase"; the use of "appreciable" conveys the intended meaning - that a significantly large increase in the level of the river had not resulted from the showers. Further, Option D correctly uses the past perfect tense verb "had resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring. Additionally, Option D correctly uses the idiomatic construction "no + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river. Besides, Option D is free of any awkwardness and redundancy.

E: This answer choice incorrectly uses the simple past tense verb "resulted" to refer to the earlier of two actions that concluded in the past - the government making an announcement and a significantly large increase in the level of the river not occurring; please remember, the past perfect tense (marked by the use of helping verb "had") is used when a sentence contains two actions in the past; the helping verb "had" is used with the action in the "greater past", and the simple past tense is used to refer to events that concluded in the past. Further, Option E incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "not + any + noun ("appreciable increase")" to refer to the absence of an appreciable increase in the level of the river; please remember, "no + noun" is an idiomatic construction used to refer to the absence of a noun. Additionally, Option E uses the passive voice construction "using water would continue being restricted", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

Hence, D is the best answer choice.

Additional Note: Please note, "appreciable" means "significant enough to be noted", and "appreciative" means "grateful" or "thankful"; the two words are similar, but have completely different meanings.


All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Show more


In Option A, I think the only error is the use of ''appreciative'' instead of ''appreciable.'' Since the use of 'because' acts as a time marker in the first clause, I believe 'resulted' or 'had resulted', both are applicable. Correct me if I am wrong. And I chose option A as I thought in Option D, had resulted and had fallen are both in the past perfect form although there is time marker 'before' for had fallen, Isnt it wrong to use past perfect for both events when there is a time marker?
For example,

Mary had locked the door before she had left - Incorrect
Mary locked the door before she left - Correct
Mary had locked the door before she left - Correct

Kindly clarify pls.
User avatar
Vegita
User avatar
Joined: 23 May 2020
Last visit: 08 Sep 2025
Posts: 86
Own Kudos:
12
Given Kudos: 1,528
Posts: 86
Kudos: 12
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 20 Dec 2022, 21:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi AjiteshArun

(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that

Would I be correct to say that 'had' is used as a simple past tense here? For a perfect past tense, we need a helping verb such as had resulted, had done, etc.

The phrase, "there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level" sounds active rather than passive to me. Please correct me, if I am wrong because I read some users stating that the tone is passive.

(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had

Even though this is the correct option, it uses the passive tone "no appreciable increase in the level of the river had". Correct?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 21 Dec 2022, 06:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat ReedArnoldMPREP AjiteshArun - Focussing on "Resulted"

I wasnt sure if "resulted" was a verb or was it a verb-ed (past participle adjective)

I know "resulted" can be BOTH a verb or an adjective

Question - how do you quickly make that judgment call ? I was struggling

Based on my experience of the English language -- "resulted" usually is used in the context of an adjective

  • Climate change resulted from years of Humans Polluting the environment is dangerous.
  • Humans resulted from years of evolution are adapatable to any environment.
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 21 Dec 2022, 08:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
egmat ReedArnoldMPREP AjiteshArun - Focussing on "Resulted"

I wasnt sure if "resulted" was a verb or was it a verb-ed (past participle adjective)

I know "resulted" can be BOTH a verb or an adjective

Question - how do you quickly make that judgment call ? I was struggling

Based on my experience of the English language -- "resulted" usually is used in the context of an adjective

  • Climate change resulted from years of Humans Polluting the environment is dangerous.
  • Humans resulted from years of evolution are adapatable to any environment.
Show more

This is the case with many 'ed' modifiers, and the only way to really know is to determine how it's used in the sentence.

"The machines constructed out of scrap metal will build automobiles."

"The machines constructed out of scrap metal automobiles."

In the first 'constructed' is describing what the machines were made out of: scrap metal. The verb for 'the machines' is 'will build.'


In the second, 'constructed' is a verb for 'the machines' to do. There is no other option for the verb in this sentence. They construct automobiles, and the 'out of scrap metal' is a modifier for how they do that (it is admittedly somewhat awkwardly placed, but not technically wrong).

The basic idea is to first notice where the subject of a sentence is, then pair it with a verb (and, yes, make sure it's not a trap-modifier and the REAL verb comes later in the sentence... It's a rare trap, but it does happen).

As for 'resulted,' I actually think it will almost always be a VERB.

"The increase in prices resulted from a decrease in supply."

"The business's success resulted from the hard work of the initial founders, who built the enterprise out of nothing."

The way you're using 'resulted' as an adjective might not be wrong, but it is certainly unusual.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,885
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,885
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 21 Dec 2022, 09:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Jayadeepan


In Option A, I think the only error is the use of ''appreciative'' instead of ''appreciable.'' Since the use of 'because' acts as a time marker in the first clause, I believe 'resulted' or 'had resulted', both are applicable. Correct me if I am wrong. And I chose option A as I thought in Option D, had resulted and had fallen are both in the past perfect form although there is time marker 'before' for had fallen, Isnt it wrong to use past perfect for both events when there is a time marker?
For example,

Mary had locked the door before she had left - Incorrect
Mary locked the door before she left - Correct
Mary had locked the door before she left - Correct

Kindly clarify pls.
Show more


Hello Jayadeepan,

Yes, your understanding is correct indeed. The only error in Choice A is the incorrect use of "appreciative", which means "grateful".



Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,885
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,885
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 21 Dec 2022, 09:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
egmat ReedArnoldMPREP AjiteshArun - Focussing on "Resulted"

I wasnt sure if "resulted" was a verb or was it a verb-ed (past participle adjective)

I know "resulted" can be BOTH a verb or an adjective

Question - how do you quickly make that judgment call ? I was struggling

Based on my experience of the English language -- "resulted" usually is used in the context of an adjective

  • Climate change resulted from years of Humans Polluting the environment is dangerous.
  • Humans resulted from years of evolution are adapatable to any environment.
Show more


Hello jabhatta2,

Thank you for the query. I will be happy to help you with this one. :)

Let's first understand what a verb-ed modifier is. A verb-ed modifier acts as a noun modifier and is placed before or after the noun it is meant to modify. The important point is that the action presented by the verb-ed modifier is the action received by the noun that it modifies. Let's study a simple sentence to understand this vital point.

Uncle John, dressed as Santa, distributed candies to all the kids in the neighborhood.

The word "dressed" is a verb-ed modifier that modifies the preceding noun "Uncle John". This modifier denotes the action of dressing, and Uncle John is the receiver of this action as he was dressed as Santa. So, Uncle John is the recipient of the action "dressed".

Now, we have another verb-ed word in this sentence - distributed. This word is a simple past tense verb because it is an action performed/done by the subject "Uncle John". This is the point of difference between the verb-ed modifier and the verb-ed (simple past tense) verb. Now, let's analyze the example sentences you mentioned in our post.

Climate change resulted from years of Humans Polluting the environment is dangerous.

So, let's ask - is climate change the receiver of the action "resulted"? Did climate change lead to years of humans polluting the environment? Or did climate change happen from the said factor? It is the second point. So, the word "resulted" actually works as the simple past tense verb in this sentence. We need to change "resulted" into "resulting" to correct this sentence.

Humans resulted from years of evolution are adaptable to any environment.

The same is the case with this sentence also. Humans did not lead to years of evolution. they themselves came from years of evolution. So, we need the word "resulting" here.

So, the verb "resulted" in this official sentence is a verb because the increase did not happen.

You can read this famous article by us to understand how to differentiate between the verb-ed modifier and the verb-ed verb: https://gmatclub.com/forum/ed-forms-verbs-or-modifiers-134691.html


Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water Updated on: 21 Dec 2022, 13:05
Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 21 Dec 2022, 12:55.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 21 Dec 2022, 13:05, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi egmat - thank you for the article - i have read the famous article. It is very good :)

Couple of quick questions on the response.

Q1) In the sentence below (Yellow highlight) -- i agree that Humans are not the "DOER" of "resulted from years of evolution"

Hence "Resulted" CANNOT be a verb

Instead - I thought - "Resulted" is an adjective (past participle)

However, you mention -- "Resulted" as a past participle ALSO does not work (based on the blue font below)

Why doesnt "Resulted" as a past participle work in the below sentence (in the yellow) ?

egmat

Humans resulted from years of evolution are adaptable to any environment.

The same is the case with this sentence also. Humans did not lead to years of evolution. they themselves came from years of evolution. So, we need the word "resulting" here.

Show more
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,885
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,885
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water 21 Dec 2022, 13:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Hi egmat - thank you for the article - i have read the famous article. It is very good :)

Couple of quick questions on the response.

Q1) In the sentence below (Yellow highlight) -- i agree that Humans are not the "DOER" of "resulted from years of evolution"

Hence "Resulted" CANNOT be a verb

Instead - I thought - "Resulted" is an adjective (past participle)

However, you mention -- "Resulted" as a past participle ALSO does not work (based on the blue font below)

Why doesnt "Resulted" as a past participle work in the below sentence (in the yellow) ?

egmat



Humans resulted from years of evolution are adaptable to any environment.

The same is the case with this sentence also. Humans did not lead to years of evolution. they themselves came from years of evolution. So, we need the word "resulting" here.

Show more



Hello jabhatta2,

Thank you for the follow-up query. :)

The word "resulted" means "occurred as an effect". Let's replace "resulted" with this phrase in the example sentence:

Humans occurred as an effect from years of evolution are adaptable to any environment.

Do you see now what the sentence says? The word "resulted" actually acts as a simple past tense verb in this sentence, suggesting that humans resulted from something. Yes, "humans" are the receiver of the action denoted by "resulted". However, the nature of this word is such that it acts as a verb and not as a verb-ed modifier, as proven through the modified sentence above. The word "resulting" will act as an adjective for "humans" in this sentence.

The same logic is applicable to the "climate change" sentence as well. I strongly feel that "resulted" cannot be used as a verb-ed modifier.


Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
188 posts