GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 20 Oct 2019, 23:10

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

In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi

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

Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2015
Posts: 2
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V33
In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

12 Oct 2015, 00:55
2
1
1
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:29) correct 44% (01:29) wrong based on 226 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of the ping-pong balls in an effort to fix the tournament.

(A) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of

(B) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because of their illegal weighting of

(C) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owe restitution to four national ping- pong teams for their illegal weighting of

￼(D) on two ping-pong ball manufacturers that owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because they illegally weighted

(E) on the restitution that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5104
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

12 Oct 2015, 08:27
1
1
(A) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of – correct choice

(B) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because of their illegal weighting of -- ‘their’ is ambiguous. Does it refer to the teams or manufacturers?

(C) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owe restitution to four national ping- pong teams for their illegal weighting of --same as B

￼(D) on two ping-pong ball manufacturers that owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because they illegally weighted – ‘ruled on’ is wrong diction. It should be ‘ruled that' and the ltter part should be amended accordingly ’

(E) on the restitution that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of – same as in D.
_________________
Are you stuck around 630? If you can't make out how to pole-vault over the 630-barrier, you can do so with my one-to-one lessons. (+919884544509)
Manager
Joined: 23 Jun 2016
Posts: 91
Re: In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Aug 2017, 11:33
is "ruled" a subjunctive (order)? I chose C thinking this
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jun 2017
Posts: 399
Location: Russian Federation
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
WE: Information Technology (Other)
Re: In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Aug 2017, 11:57
zrezre wrote:
In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two ping-pong ball
manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal
weighting of
the ping-pong balls in an effort to fix the tournament.

(A) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of
(B) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because of their illegal weighting of
(C) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owe restitution to four national ping- pong teams for their illegal weighting of
(D) on two ping-pong ball manufacturers that owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because they illegally weighted
(E) on the restitution that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of

You had not to choose C, because as daagh has already said it is not clear in this case to whom "their" refers to - to manufactures or to teams.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58422
Re: In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

31 Aug 2018, 01:47
zrezre wrote:
In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of the ping-pong balls in an effort to fix the tournament.

(A) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of

(B) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because of their illegal weighting of

(C) that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owe restitution to four national ping- pong teams for their illegal weighting of

￼(D) on two ping-pong ball manufacturers that owed restitution to four national ping-pong teams because they illegally weighted

(E) on the restitution that two ping-pong ball manufacturers owed to four national ping-pong teams for the illegal weighting of

MANHATTAN REVIEW OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

Here the first thing you have to ask yourself is: what did the judge rule? Did he rule on two ping-pong ball manufacturers or on restitution? No, the judge ruled that they owed something. That means that A, B and C are the only possible answer choices. You have to also maintain an agreement in tenses. The judge ruled that somebody owed something, not owes. That eliminates choice C. One difference between choices A and B is the use of different idioms. The manufacturers owed restitution for something, not because of something. This is the correct idiomatic expression. The use of ‘their’ is B is also ambiguous. Choice A is the correct answer.
_________________
Re: In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi   [#permalink] 31 Aug 2018, 01:47
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the most bizarre court case this month, the judge ruled that two pi

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

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne