Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 00:27

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Has been Vs Was

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 10
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2005, 01:37
Although the Supreme Court ruled as long ago as 1880 that Blacks could not be excluded outright from jury service, nearly a century of case-by-case adjudication has been necessary to develop and enforce the principle that all juries must be drawn from â€œa fair cross section of the community.â€
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2005, 05:02
I'll go with B. I don't see a grammatical error in it, despite the fact that it does sound awkward.

I think the inapproriate use of present perfect in A is the bigger problem here. "Nearly a century" after 1880 implies that the process has already concluded, so we should use past simple.

All in all, this a lousy question and a really close call. Any of the two answers could be correct, depending on what assumptions you make and how you support them...

Vasil
Intern
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 15
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2005, 20:01
I'd also go with A.

In addition to what Vasil said, B sounds bad and may be ambigious.

The principle of all juries Are we inforcing the principle of all juries? It sounds as if the juries have a principle and we are trying to enforce it.
Intern
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 41
Location: North Carolina
Followers: 0

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

Re: Has been Vs Was [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2005, 23:50
Doesn't "Necessary for" look awkward?
I would go with option A, "Necessary to" looks more fine.
Intern
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 10
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2005, 08:36
Thanks for the replies ....

is it approriate to use present perfect (choice A)
Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2005, 11:20
gmatdena wrote:
Thanks for the replies ....

is it approriate to use present perfect (choice A)

Really depends on which timeframe we choose to focus on. I think that "nearly a hundred years after 1880" means that the process is over, so we should use past simple. Present perfect is used to express a process, which continues in / upto the present, but we are not talking about the present, are we?

If we still haven't managed to enforce the "principle that ...", present perfect is the obvious choice here. It sounds to me like we finished the job about 25 years ago, so I'm sticking with (B)

gmatdena, by the way you have asked your question, I can tell that I am wrong...
14 Aug 2005, 11:20
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
6 Has/Have/Had been - Difference 6 06 Mar 2017, 00:14
'Have' vs 'has' 4 24 Nov 2013, 14:20
Present Perfect: Have vs. Have Been 3 12 Aug 2008, 12:50
None of my friends have been OR None of my friends has been 7 16 Mar 2008, 00:15
has vs have 1 09 Jun 2007, 20:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by