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

It is currently 15 Oct 2018, 12:19

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William

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

Hide Tags

SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1193
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2018, 01:06
6
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

61% (01:39) correct 39% (01:31) wrong based on 160 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who opposed evolution on religious grounds, argued that evolution not be taught in public schools, while famed trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it be.

A. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who opposed evolution on religious grounds, argued that evolution not be taught in public schools, while famed trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it be

B. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan opposed evolution on the grounds of religion and also argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, but that evolution should be taught in public schools was argued by Clarence Darrow, who was a famous trial lawyer

C. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times and who had opposed evolution on religious grounds, had argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, while Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued with it

D. William Jennings Bryan, who ran for President three times, opposed evolution on the grounds of religion, as he argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued for it

E. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times, opposing evolution on religious grounds, argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, although famous trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it should be

_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 286
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2018, 01:36
aragonn wrote:
In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who opposed evolution on religious grounds, argued that evolution not be taught in public schools, while famed trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it be.

A. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who opposed evolution on religious grounds, argued that evolution not be taught in public schools, while famed trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it be

B. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan opposed evolution on the grounds of religion and also argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, but that evolution should be taught in public schools was argued by Clarence Darrow, who was a famous trial lawyer

C. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times and who had opposed evolution on religious grounds, had argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, while Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued with it

D. William Jennings Bryan, who ran for President three times, opposed evolution on the grounds of religion, as he argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued for it

E. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times, opposing evolution on religious grounds, argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, although famous trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it should be


+1 for A

A. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who opposed evolution on religious grounds, argued that evolution not be taught in public schools, while famed trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it be
--> No errors in the sentence, it is grammatically and logically correct.

B. three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan opposed evolution on the grounds of religion and also argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, but that evolution should be taught in public schools was argued by Clarence Darrow, who was a famous trial lawyer
--> Actual meaning of the sentence is William Jennings Bryan argued about evolution in scopes trial. This sentence changes the meaning to William Jennings Bryan opposed evolution in scopes trial. Modifier error

C. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times and who had opposed evolution on religious grounds, had argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, while Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued with it
--> 'had' is not required, as time is already mentioned in the non-underlined part. Apart from that sentence looks grammatically correct.

D. William Jennings Bryan, who ran for President three times, opposed evolution on the grounds of religion, as he argued that evolution should not be taught in public schools, Clarence Darrow, a famous trial lawyer, had argued for it
-->This sentence is redundant. With Subjunctive word 'argued', 'should' is redundant.

E. William Jennings Bryan, who had run for President three times, opposing evolution on religious grounds, argued against the teaching of evolution in public schools, although famous trial lawyer Clarence Darrow argued that it should be
--> Subjunctive word 'argued' required 'that'
_________________

Only those who risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go

SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1193
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Sep 2018, 01:53

Official Explanation


A question about the famous Scopes trial, which pitted William Jennings Bryan against Clarence Darrow.

As in the famous trial, this sentence should show contrast between the two sides.

Choice (A): this choice clearly states Bryan’s view, correctly using the subjunctive in the first “that” clause and in the “that” clause for Darrow. This second “that” clause elegantly drops the common words in parallel.

Choice (B): This is very wordy, the longest answer. It redundantly spells out Darrow’s opinion, repeating many words just used, and states the second clause in the passive, making it even longer and meandering. This is a complete trainwreck. This choice is incorrect.

Choice (C): Every single verb is in the past perfect tense: this is illogical, because the past perfect tense only makes sense in comparison to something in the simple past tense. Also, the final part has the wrong idiom. If we say “A argued for X,” then we know that was an advocate of X. By contrast, if we say, “A argued with X,” then it sounds like A was an opponent of X. The structure here suggests that Darrow was an opponent of evolution, so he would have been agreeing with Bryan: then, nothing about the sentence makes sense! This choice is incorrect.

Choice (D): The logic of the “as” clause is unclear. Also, this sentence has a comma splice, that is, it separates the two independent clauses with only a comma, and there’s no conjunction properly joining them. Finally, it’s unclear why Darrow’s verb is in the past perfect tense, since the two men were there having the argument at the same time. This choice is incorrect.

Choice (E): the “although” is jarring as a contrast word here. The contrast words “but” and “while” connote powerful contrast: “Mike argued yes, but Chris argued no.” BAM! The word “although” is softer, suggesting that there’s something we didn’t expect about the different. These expectations don’t fit the subject matter. Also, the parallelism is faulty. The first branch has “the teaching of evolution” and the second branch has “that it should be.” That final phrase is waiting for a verb, but there’s not a full verb in the first branch, only a gerund—if we substituted that in, it would make no sense: “that it should be the teaching of evolution …” This choice is incorrect.

The only possible answer is (A).
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 286
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2018, 11:00
i have a query !

does the verb " argue" take a subjunctive form? i mean i have never seen "argue" take a subjuncyive frm .

mikemcgarry please enlighten
SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1193
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2018, 13:46
AdityaHongunti wrote:
i have a query !

does the verb " argue" take a subjunctive form? i mean i have never seen "argue" take a subjuncyive frm .

mikemcgarry please enlighten

yes argue is in the list and it uses 'that' for the usage.
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 286
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2018, 18:43
aragonn wrote:
AdityaHongunti wrote:
i have a query !

does the verb " argue" take a subjunctive form? i mean i have never seen "argue" take a subjuncyive frm .

mikemcgarry please enlighten

yes argue is in the list and it uses 'that' for the usage.



No no I know the "argue" should be followed by that

I'm referring to the later part.. "be...."

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Bot
Re: In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William &nbs [#permalink] 29 Sep 2018, 18:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the Scopes Trial in 1925, three-time Presidential candidate William

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.