It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 14:49

### 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

# Events & Promotions

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

# Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind

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

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 29 [1], given: 0

Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2007, 06:55
1
This post received
KUDOS
28
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

70% (00:54) correct 30% (01:04) wrong based on 2949 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 29 [1], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Posts: 33

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Location: bangalore

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2007, 07:04
I like C.

Contrast is clearly shown between the time when the composers live and the time after their death.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1439

Kudos [?]: 218 [8], given: 13

Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Re: SC - Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer (OG11) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2007, 07:09
8
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
pau.sabria wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again

regains popularity again is redundant usage. Also, once the composer is dead, he cannot often go into decline!

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

... regain again is redundant usage again

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again

declines in reputation seems awkward; regained is in the wrong tense

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity
has declined in reputation after death is awkward - present perfect is not required here

I think C uses the coordinate conjunction but preceded by a comma correctly; C creates two independent clauses properly contrasted by the use of BUT that creates the desired effect of the statement - the kind of composer WHO receives popular acclaim while living, BUT whose (points to the composer properly) reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

Kudos [?]: 218 [8], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 177

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2007, 08:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
I will go with C as well. The use of "but" makes the sentence more meanigful.
_________________

Regards

Subhen

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 29 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2007, 09:25
1
This post received
KUDOS
OA is C.

Thanks to you all.

However, official explanation says:

(B) The two clauses are not parallel, lack of coordinating conjunction, and do not describe the same thing; reduntant again.

(C) Correct. This sentence presents the proper logic while maintaining parallel structure and consistent verb tense.

Can anybody explain me why (B) is not describing the same thing and (C) is?

Kudos [?]: 29 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 177

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: SC - Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer (OG11) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2008, 18:31
i think the only error with B is "regain ... again"

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 16 Jan 2010
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 1

Re: SC - Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer (OG11) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2010, 01:45
dwivedys wrote:
pau.sabria wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again

regains popularity again is redundant usage. Also, once the composer is dead, he cannot often go into decline!

(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

... regain again is redundant usage again

(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again

declines in reputation seems awkward; regained is in the wrong tense

(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity
has declined in reputation after death is awkward - present perfect is not required here

I think C uses the coordinate conjunction but preceded by a comma correctly; C creates two independent clauses properly contrasted by the use of BUT that creates the desired effect of the statement - the kind of composer WHO receives popular acclaim while living, BUT whose (points to the composer properly) reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

tks for your detailed explanation! It helps me a lot!

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 1

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 277

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 23

Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Re: SC - Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer (OG11) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2011, 05:15
Besides option C no other option uses a fitting contrasting word (which is required to have emphasis on different parts of life of such composers)
_________________

My GMAT Journey 540->680->730!

~ When the going gets tough, the Tough gets going!

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 23

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2011
Posts: 280

Kudos [?]: 962 [0], given: 23

Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Mar 2012, 22:43
use of contrasting word 'but' is very crucial here. rest of mostly have wrong modifications
_________________

********************
Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post.

Kudos [?]: 962 [0], given: 23

Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 131

Kudos [?]: 251 [0], given: 23

GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V37
GMAT 2: 720 Q48 V40
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2012, 03:19
I'd also go with C. Obviously the composer doesn't decline after death, but his reputation does. But stresses the change in the reputation from life to the time after death.

Kudos [?]: 251 [0], given: 23

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4485

Kudos [?]: 17028 [2], given: 1963

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2012, 23:59
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity
_________________

Kudos [?]: 17028 [2], given: 1963

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4485

Kudos [?]: 17028 [3], given: 1963

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2012, 00:15
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Concept tested: Redundancy, preposition, parallelism, modifiers.
Difficulty: 700
Illustration: Carefully examine the following sentence
My sister, who is a teenager, and whose street play was appreciated by all, won the local talent award yesterday.
This is a perfectly correct sentence as “who is a teenager” and “whose street play was appreciated by all” both modifier the subject “My sister”.

Now lets look at the options.
A is wrong because the composer does not go into decline after his or her death, but his or her reputation does.
B is incorrect because it uses redundant construction “regains its status again”.
D and E are wrong for the same reason we eliminated A i.e the composer himself does not go into decline after death.
C is correct (option C breaks the FANBOYS rule, which a lot of prep companies advocate to eliminate answer choices. Please see below for clarification.).

Tip:
A lot of prep companies adopt the rule of FANBOYS which says
Independent clause, independent clause is a run on sentence.
o to make it correct we use the construction:
Independent clause, FANBOYS independent clause; FANBOYS stands for “For, And, Not, But, Or, Yet, So”.
However, the converse is not necessarily true. Two clauses separated by comma and FANBOYS do not necessarily mean they need to be independent clauses.
E.g My brother loves to drive so fast that his co passengers often fear being headlined in the newspapers the following day, and hates to wear seat-belts.
The sentence without the punctuation would become haywire.
Also, the punctuation rules are not tested on the GMAT.

_________________

Kudos [?]: 17028 [3], given: 1963

Manager
Status: Fighting again to Kill the GMAT devil
Joined: 02 Jun 2009
Posts: 135

Kudos [?]: 74 [1], given: 48

Location: New Delhi
WE 1: Oil and Gas - Engineering & Construction
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2012, 02:00
1
This post received
KUDOS
souvik101990 wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

I will go with {C}

(A) presents a List - "kind of composer who receives X, often goes Y, and never regains Z. But the sentence wants to show how the popularity of such composers decline after their death.
(B) whose referring to what?
(D) creates parallel list by using "who" - not required, we need to show contrast of what happens when the composer is alive and what happens after his death.
(E) then has declined - What has declined?
_________________

Giving Kudos, is a great Way to Help the GC Community Kudos

Kudos [?]: 74 [1], given: 48

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4289

Kudos [?]: 7911 [6], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2012, 05:46
6
This post received
KUDOS
The first split is going to be on redundancy. Regain and again do not go together. So, let’s remove A, B and D.
Second, between C and E, E distorts the meaning saying that the composer has declined, and never regained his popularity, especially after death. Can a dead person decline and regain? But the intended meaning is that the reputation declines and never regains its earlier status. Hence C.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7911 [6], given: 364

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4485

Kudos [?]: 17028 [1], given: 1963

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2012, 08:43
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
daagh wrote:
The first split is going to be on redundancy. Regain and again do not go together. So, let’s remove A, B and D.
Second, between C and E, E distorts the meaning saying that the composer has declined, and never regained his popularity, especially after death. Can a dead person decline and regain? But the intended meaning is that the reputation declines and never regains its earlier status. Hence C.

I wish I could post multiple kudos for your posts!
Your verbal explanations are among the best in the forum.
Cheers.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 17028 [1], given: 1963

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2311

Kudos [?]: 9045 [1], given: 335

Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2012, 10:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
We have covered this sentence in our article "Alien word not so alien". This sentence is easy if you pay attention to meaning:

alien-words-not-so-alien-136331.html

Here is the explanation:

Let me just compare the correct answer choice (C) with the original answer choice (A):
A. often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
C. but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

The first thing to notice here is that Choice C has far many new words than Choice A. These words are “but, whose, reputation, former, status”. Yet, this choice is the correct answer.
Now let’s analyze both these answer choices from meaning standpoint to better understand the role of the alien words in choice C.

Choice A: Per this choice, the sentence says that a certain kind of composer gains popularity while alive, declines after death and never regains his popularity. This meaning just does not make sense because once the composer has died, he cannot decline any further. This choice conveys absolutely illogical meaning.

Choice C: Per this answer choice, a certain kind of composer gains popularity when alive, but after death, his reputation declines and it never regains its previous status. Indeed. This answer choice makes all the sense and hence is the correct answer choice.

Look at the article to see some other examples that test this concept.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Kudos [?]: 9045 [1], given: 335

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3356

Kudos [?]: 9063 [0], given: 1154

Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2012, 13:36
souvik101990 wrote:
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

here we have a clear example how the gmat now has a major stress on meaning, eliminating words that change the meaning of the sentence.

Focus on the word: reputation. this word is the key point because makes sense to us of what is before (the composers are popular during their life) and what happens after their death (decline of reputation)

1) wrong: lack of this key word

Now I use one of the strategy I love the most (kaplan): one you have eliminated A compare 2 sentence at time, in this scenario: B and C. This one is useful in particular now that gmat use sentences with no clear split among the choices, with an increase of difficulty.

2) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again

3) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status

Notice the lack of conjunction in 2 BUT and status again VS former status. here the meaning tends to a former status because we have a previous status (fame), then a lower status (after death). Moreover, in 2 we have regains and after gains, redundant. Hold 3 for now

4) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again.

here the underlined portion starts with WHO and you suddenly must be think what : ehi we have already WHO before, in the non-underlined portion. As soon as you see somethings like this you can eliminate the answer. We do not care about implication, why could be wrong or right, up and down...........no way. WRONG no matter what

5) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity.

Often, in gmat land, certain kind of answer are impossible, with a lack of sense, regardless.

C) is the answer

As you can see i always try to follow one of the most usefull instruction of Ron from MGMAT: be flexible. If you haven't a split, switch strategy as soon as, or viceversa......you know
_________________

Kudos [?]: 9063 [0], given: 1154

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4485

Kudos [?]: 17028 [0], given: 1963

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2012, 00:36
Concept tested: Redundancy, preposition, parallelism, modifiers.
Difficulty: 700
Illustration: Carefully examine the following sentence
My sister, who is a teenager, and whose street play was appreciated by all, won the local talent award yesterday.
This is a perfectly correct sentence as “who is a teenager” and “whose street play was appreciated by all” both modifier the subject “My sister”.

Now lets look at the options.
A is wrong because the composer does not go into decline after his or her death, but his or her reputation does.
B is incorrect because it uses redundant construction “regains its status again”.
D and E are wrong for the same reason we eliminated A i.e the composer himself does not go into decline after death.
C is correct (option C breaks the FANBOYS rule, which a lot of prep companies advocate to eliminate answer choices. Please see below for clarification.).

Tip:
A lot of prep companies adopt the rule of FANBOYS which says
Independent clause, independent clause is a run on sentence.
o to make it correct we use the construction:
Independent clause, FANBOYS independent clause; FANBOYS stands for “For, And, Not, But, Or, Yet, So”.
However, the converse is not necessarily true. Two clauses separated by comma and FANBOYS do not necessarily mean they need to be independent clauses.
E.g My brother loves to drive so fast that his co passengers often fear being headlined in the newspapers the following day, and hates to wear seat-belts.
The sentence without the punctuation would become haywire.
Also, the punctuation rules are not tested on the GMAT.

_________________

Kudos [?]: 17028 [0], given: 1963

Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2012
Posts: 33

Kudos [?]: 50 [1], given: 4

GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2012, 09:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind of composer who receives popular acclaim while living, often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again.

(A) often goes into decline after death, and never regains popularity again
(B) whose reputation declines after death and never regains its status again
(C) but whose reputation declines after death and never regains its former status
(D) who declines in reputation after death and who never regained popularity again
(E) then has declined in reputation after death and never regained popularity

Kudos [?]: 50 [1], given: 4

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: OG13 V-137 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2012, 01:22
Underline the part, which you want us to correct.

joachim-raff-and-giacomo-meyerbeer-are-examples-of-the-kind-139350.html
_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Re: OG13 V-137   [#permalink] 12 Oct 2012, 01:22

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 47 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Joachim Raff and Giacomo Meyerbeer are examples of the kind

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

 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®.