It is currently 16 Dec 2017, 18:35

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed

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

Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 1271

Kudos [?]: 2427 [0], given: 178

Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2015, 08:08
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

72% (00:56) correct 28% (00:45) wrong based on 255 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer, including over two hundred complete cantatas and almost 500 separate works for solo instruments.

A) J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer
B) J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than any other classical composer
C) J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
D) J.S. Bach, more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
E) In terms of sheer hours of music composed, J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Simple way to always control time during the quant part.
How to solve main idea questions without full understanding of RC.
660 (Q48, V33) - unpleasant surprise
740 (Q50, V40, IR3) - anti-debrief ;)

Kudos [?]: 2427 [0], given: 178

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Apr 2015
Posts: 50

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 118

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 620 Q46 V27
GPA: 3.86
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2015, 17:08
Chose C because of the modifier touch rule

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 118

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2016, 09:19
Q J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer, including over two hundred complete cantatas and almost 500 separate works for solo instruments.

A)J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer
B)J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than any other classical composer
C)J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
D)J.S. Bach, more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
E)In terms of sheer hours of music composed, J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 20 Mar 2014
Posts: 2673

Kudos [?]: 1790 [0], given: 797

Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: Kellogg '18 (M)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.7
WE: Engineering (Aerospace and Defense)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2016, 09:23
smartguy595 wrote:
Q J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer, including over two hundred complete cantatas and almost 500 separate works for solo instruments.

A)J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer
B)J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than any other classical composer
C)J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
D)J.S. Bach, more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
E)In terms of sheer hours of music composed, J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer


Search for a question before starting a new thread. This question has already been discussed before. Merging topics.

Kudos [?]: 1790 [0], given: 797

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2016, 09:27
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Harley1980 wrote:
J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer, including over two hundred complete cantatas and almost 500 separate works for solo instruments.

A) J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than was any other classical composer
B) J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed than any other classical composer
C) J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
D) J.S. Bach, more prolific than any other classical composer in terms of sheer hours of music composed
E) In terms of sheer hours of music composed, J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer


OE mentioned from magoosh as below

Split #1: order of words in the comparison. Where do we put the "in terms of" phrase, and do we need a "was" following the word "than"? This is tricky. If we put the "than" right after "more prolific"—"J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other classical composer"—then we are comparing noun-to-noun, and don't need the word "was" following the "than"; the "in terms of" phrase can come either before or after this comparison. This order of words is correctly executed in choices (C) & (D) & (E).

An alternative correct order would be to follow the comparative "more prolific" immediately with the "in terms of" phrase—"J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed"—this is an entire independent clause, and now when we stick the "than" at the end of this, we are making a comparison to that independent clause, so we need full [noun]+[verb] clause following the "than" —here, we should have the word "was" following the word "than". Choice (A) does this correctly. Choice (B) implies the verb without stating it: this is technically correct, but awkward, and may be open to ambiguity.

Split #2: the modifier after the underlined section. This modifier—"including over two hundred complete cantatas and almost 500 separate works for solo instruments" —clearly describes works, not people. Notice what is directly before the comma, at the end of the underlined section. Choices (A) & (B) & (E) have "any other classical composer"—this is incorrect—people can't include pieces of music. Choices (C) & (D) correctly have "music composed", which of course can include pieces of music.

Split #3: notice that, in all five answer choices, good old J.S. Bach is the main subject of the sentence. In four of the answer choices, the main verb is "was". In choice (D), we get [subject][modifier][modifier], without any verb. Choice (D) makes the famous "missing verb" mistake, so this choice is incorrect.

Because of all of these, choice (C) is the only possible answer.

But I did not understand Split-2 ; how the modifier including modifies people in options A,B & E

IMO as comma is present before participle "including" it modifies the Preceding clause by presenting additional information of the clause or describing the result of the clause :(
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2016, 05:45
Hi chetan2u

I did not understand Split-2 in above OE ;

how the modifier including modifies people in options A,B & E

IMO as comma is present before participle "including" it modifies the Preceding clause by presenting additional information of the clause or describing the result of the clause :(

If comma is not there above explanation is fine.

Please advise where am I going wrong
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Retired Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4321

Kudos [?]: 8356 [0], given: 366

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2016, 07:30
The intent of the text is that Bach produced more music than others. Its intention is to compare the volume of his composing which were more than the works of other composers.
The non-underlined adverbial modifier ‘including’ does modify Bach and his music compositions. One may see it refers to works and not persons. That is the reason A, B and E are out. Between C and D, D is a fragment. C prevails
_________________

Can you solve at least some SC questions without delving into the initial statement?

Narendran 98845 44509

Kudos [?]: 8356 [0], given: 366

Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3227

Kudos [?]: 3649 [2], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2016, 20:57
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
smartguy595 wrote:
Hi chetan2u

I did not understand Split-2 in above OE ;

how the modifier including modifies people in options A,B & E

IMO as comma is present before participle "including" it modifies the Preceding clause by presenting additional information of the clause or describing the result of the clause :(

If comma is not there above explanation is fine.

Please advise where am I going wrong


A present participle modifier (a modifier starting with verb+-ing) may refer to the whole clause preceding it or to the subject of the preceding clause.

Here the modifier starting with including should refer to hours of music composed, which is neither the whole clause nor the subject of the clause in options A, B amd E.

However an -ing modifier, like all other modifiers, may refer to an antecedent just preceding it. Hence option C is correct - the modifier including two hundred..... refers to the antecedent (hours of music composed) it touches (although I would still question the use of comma in option C).

Kudos [?]: 3649 [2], given: 22

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 376

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 199

Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 2.8
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Mar 2016, 00:23
sayantanc2k wrote:
smartguy595 wrote:
Hi chetan2u

I did not understand Split-2 in above OE ;

how the modifier including modifies people in options A,B & E

IMO as comma is present before participle "including" it modifies the Preceding clause by presenting additional information of the clause or describing the result of the clause :(

If comma is not there above explanation is fine.

Please advise where am I going wrong


A present participle modifier (a modifier starting with verb+-ing) may refer to the whole clause preceding it or to the subject of the preceding clause.

Here the modifier starting with including should refer to hours of music composed, which is neither the whole clause nor the subject of the clause in options A, B amd E.

However an -ing modifier, like all other modifiers, may refer to an antecedent just preceding it. Hence option C is correct - the modifier including two hundred..... refers to the antecedent (hours of music composed) it touches (although I would still question the use of comma in option C).



hi Chetan,

A verb-ing modifier preceded with a Comma always does two things 1.Present additional information about an action that happened in the preceding clause 2. Present the effect of the action that took place in the preceding clause.

If there was no comma it directly modifies the hours of music composed.
But with Comma it looks like J S BAch is more prolific by including hours of music composed.
Which doesn't look correct to me.

Please correct me if i am wrong.

Thanks,
go

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 199

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3227

Kudos [?]: 3649 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Mar 2016, 03:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
goforgmat wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
smartguy595 wrote:
Hi chetan2u

I did not understand Split-2 in above OE ;

how the modifier including modifies people in options A,B & E

IMO as comma is present before participle "including" it modifies the Preceding clause by presenting additional information of the clause or describing the result of the clause :(

If comma is not there above explanation is fine.

Please advise where am I going wrong


A present participle modifier (a modifier starting with verb+-ing) may refer to the whole clause preceding it or to the subject of the preceding clause.

Here the modifier starting with including should refer to hours of music composed, which is neither the whole clause nor the subject of the clause in options A, B amd E.

However an -ing modifier, like all other modifiers, may refer to an antecedent just preceding it. Hence option C is correct - the modifier including two hundred..... refers to the antecedent (hours of music composed) it touches (although I would still question the use of comma in option C).



hi Chetan,

A verb-ing modifier preceded with a Comma always does two things 1.Present additional information about an action that happened in the preceding clause 2. Present the effect of the action that took place in the preceding clause.

If there was no comma it directly modifies the hours of music composed.
But with Comma it looks like J S BAch is more prolific by including hours of music composed.
Which doesn't look correct to me.

Please correct me if i am wrong.

Thanks,
go


Yes, your feeling that it "doesn't look correct" is correct !

Let me try to clarify further (to my previous post) why such usage is wrong:

Present participle modifier, verb-ing modifier preceded with a Comma, may refer to either of the following two things:

1. Subject of the preceding clause.
Example: Bhagat Singh entered the hall, shouting slogans against the ruler.
The modifier shouting slogans against the ruler refers to the subject of the previous clause Bhagat Singh.

2. The preceding clause as a whole. (frequently an effect of the previous clause)
The average temperature of the world has increased, causing the arctic snow to melt.
The modifier causing the arctic snow to melt refers to the preceding clause as a whole (the effect of the preceding clause).

However the -ing clause cannot refer to an antecedent which is neither the subject of the preceding clause nor the preceding clause as whole.

3. Bose's Indian National Army fought against the British fiercely, finding it more and more difficult to contain the growing military strength of Bose's army.
The modifier finding it more and more difficult .......Bose's army should refer to the British; however the British is neither the subject of the previous clause nor the clause as a whole.Therefore the modifier usage is wrong in this case.

With the same reasoning the modifier including over two hundred ......for solo instruments. should refer to hours of music composed; however hours of music composed is neither the subject of the previous clause nor the clause as a whole.Therefore the modifier usage is wrong in this case.

Kudos [?]: 3649 [1], given: 22

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Always try to face your worst fear because nothing GOOD comes easy. You must be UNCOMFORTABLE to get to your COMFORT ZONE
Joined: 15 Aug 2014
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2016, 00:47
Hi sayantanc2k,

As per your explanation above, option C must be incorrect; but OE is C..Still confusing :(
_________________

"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful.” - Eric Thomas

I need to work on timing badly!!

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 472

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Oct 2014
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 37

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.26
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2016, 06:06
Hi smartguy595,
As daagh said, 'including' must modify the objects immediately preceding it.
This is the same explanation you'll find in ron's videos as well.
Most of the time, sentences with 'including'can be broken by comparing what is compared to what.
From :including over two hundred complete cantatas..... it is very clear that something other than 'composer' is compared, i.e, his work. eliminate A, B, E.
Now D is a fragment(incomplete sentence)=>eliminate
Only C makes sense=>right



Give kudos if it makes sense

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 37

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3227

Kudos [?]: 3649 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2016, 11:09
smartguy595 wrote:
Hi sayantanc2k,

As per your explanation above, option C must be incorrect; but OE is C..Still confusing :(


sayantanc2k wrote:

However an -ing modifier, like all other modifiers, may refer to an antecedent just preceding it. Hence option C is correct - the modifier including two hundred..... refers to the antecedent (hours of music composed) it touches (although I would still question the use of comma in option C).


Please see my explanation above. However ideally the comma should not have been there.

Kudos [?]: 3649 [0], given: 22

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Jan 2017
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jul 2017, 01:47
sayantanc2k wrote:

Yes, your feeling that it "doesn't look correct" is correct !

Let me try to clarify further (to my previous post) why such usage is wrong:

Present participle modifier, verb-ing modifier preceded with a Comma, may refer to either of the following two things:

1. Subject of the preceding clause.
Example: Bhagat Singh entered the hall, shouting slogans against the ruler.
The modifier shouting slogans against the ruler refers to the subject of the previous clause Bhagat Singh.

2. The preceding clause as a whole. (frequently an effect of the previous clause)
The average temperature of the world has increased, causing the arctic snow to melt.
The modifier causing the arctic snow to melt refers to the preceding clause as a whole (the effect of the preceding clause).

However the -ing clause cannot refer to an antecedent which is neither the subject of the preceding clause nor the preceding clause as whole.

3. Bose's Indian National Army fought against the British fiercely, finding it more and more difficult to contain the growing military strength of Bose's army.
The modifier finding it more and more difficult .......Bose's army should refer to the British; however the British is neither the subject of the previous clause nor the clause as a whole.Therefore the modifier usage is wrong in this case.

With the same reasoning the modifier including over two hundred ......for solo instruments. should refer to hours of music composed; however hours of music composed is neither the subject of the previous clause nor the clause as a whole.Therefore the modifier usage is wrong in this case.


IMO, the reason why "including" could refer to "hours of music," an antecedent which is neither the subject of the preceding clause nor the preceding clause itself, is that "including" is not the start of a participial phrase, but of a adjectival phrase. The adjective "including over 200 cantatas" modifies the noun "hours of music."

Look at these examples:

"The police arrested at least 135 people, claiming that such detentions are for data collection" - participial phrase, modifying the subject of main clause.

"The police arrested at least 135 people, sparking a wave of protests in the public" - participial phrase, modifying the whole main clause.

"The police arrested at least 135 people, including youths and children" - adjectival phrase, modifying a noun ("135 people").

That's why we have this correct sentence:

"J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other composer in terms of hours of music composed, including over 200 cantatas..."

My question is, if "including" is a preposition, does it have to follow the Modifier Touch Rule? Because I encounter some sentences like this actually being used in the news:

"At least 135 people were arrested, including 79 West Papuan youths and children" (1)

So why wouldn't this sentence be correct (answer B):

"J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of hours of music composed than any other composer, including over 200 cantatas..."



EDIT 1: Oh I made a big mistake! In the sentence (1), "including" becomes a participle modifying the subject "135 people," that's probably why it doesn't have to touch the noun!

EDIT 2: I also found another example where "including" doesn't follow the Touch Rule:

"The police arrested the people in the slums, including youths and children"

In this case, "including" modifies "people." However, another modifier, "in the slums," is the vital modifier; hence, it could come between "people" and "including," which is a non-vital modifier.

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Status: Enjoying the Journey
Affiliations: ND
Joined: 26 Sep 2017
Posts: 83

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 471

Schools: Rotman '21
WE: Marketing (Consulting)
Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Oct 2017, 01:55
mynguyen62 wrote:

IMO, the reason why "including" could refer to "hours of music," an antecedent which is neither the subject of the preceding clause nor the preceding clause itself, is that "including" is not the start of a participial phrase, but of a adjectival phrase. The adjective "including over 200 cantatas" modifies the noun "hours of music."

Look at these examples:

"The police arrested at least 135 people, claiming that such detentions are for data collection" - participial phrase, modifying the subject of main clause.

"The police arrested at least 135 people, sparking a wave of protests in the public" - participial phrase, modifying the whole main clause.

"The police arrested at least 135 people, including youths and children" - adjectival phrase, modifying a noun ("135 people").

That's why we have this correct sentence:

"J.S. Bach was more prolific than any other composer in terms of hours of music composed, including over 200 cantatas..."

My question is, if "including" is a preposition, does it have to follow the Modifier Touch Rule? Because I encounter some sentences like this actually being used in the news:

"At least 135 people were arrested, including 79 West Papuan youths and children" (1)

So why wouldn't this sentence be correct (answer B):

"J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of hours of music composed than any other composer, including over 200 cantatas..."



EDIT 1: Oh I made a big mistake! In the sentence (1), "including" becomes a participle modifying the subject "135 people," that's probably why it doesn't have to touch the noun!

EDIT 2: I also found another example where "including" doesn't follow the Touch Rule:

"The police arrested the people in the slums, including youths and children"

In this case, "including" modifies "people." However, another modifier, "in the slums," is the vital modifier; hence, it could come between "people" and "including," which is a non-vital modifier.


C is the correct answer

The meaning of the sentence is very essential here, it makes sense that the "music composed" is what is being modified by "including"
_________________

"Giving kudos" is a decent way to say "Thanks" and motivate contributors. Please use them, it won't cost you anything

High achievement always takes place in the framework of high expectation Charles Kettering
If we chase perfection we can catch excellence Vince Lombardi

GMAT Club Live: 5 Principles for Fast Math: https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-club-live-5-principles-for-fast-math-251028.html#p1940045
YouTube sessions by GMATNinja: https://gmatclub.com/forum/verbal-live-with-gmat-ninja-sc-pronouns-that-parallelism-250568.html#p1936104
The Best SC strategies - Amazing 4 videos by Veritas: https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-best-sc-strategies-amazing-4-videos-by-veritas-250377.html#p1934575

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 471

Re: J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed   [#permalink] 10 Oct 2017, 01:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by

J.S. Bach was more prolific in terms of sheer hours of music composed

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.