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

 It is currently 24 May 2017, 16:45

### 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

# Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take

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

### Hide Tags

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1083
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 565 [0], given: 70

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2012, 04:36
I did not find any post on parallelism. Infact using it we can just eliminate 3 options in seconds....
Parallelism contains a list that talk about the central idea.. here the central idea is law ....... Requiring and protecting are two items on the list that talks about LAW hence they both should be parallel.
C can be eliminated basis on subject verb as compliance is singular noun and protect is plural verb.....
B remains and is the answer.
However i have doubt that whether Law that require is idiomatic or not..
Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Posts: 244
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 349 [0], given: 29

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2012, 09:39
Here is another view

Laws to require is used when your purpose is to saying the aim of the law.
Laws requiring is used when you are explaining a law.
In this context , ......their compliance with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices.....is protecting. They are using the explanation of the law. Eliminate D,E

laws requiring drivers not to pass speed limit. This is actual text of laws.
Laws to ban smoke in public places . This is the actual purpose of the laws.
_________________

Please give kudos if you enjoy the explanations that I have given. Thanks

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1083
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 565 [0], given: 70

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2012, 16:03
can we not eliminate a few of the options on the basis of S- V error apart from taking "Compliance" into consideration.
saying that their compliance with laws requiring that.......
That marks the presence of a dependent clause it must have a verb but clearly first that has got no verb in it and hence can be considered wrong.
Similar manner we can eliminate C.
Manager
Joined: 13 Oct 2012
Posts: 70
Concentration: General Management, Leadership
Schools: IE '15 (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V46
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: -11 [0], given: 0

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2013, 17:29
B is correct.
Laws requiring is correct and compliance .... is protecting is correct
Laws to require is unidiomatic
VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1390
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 130 [0], given: 855

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 07:09
what is difference among

law requiring
law to requie
law for requiring

pls, help
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 3652
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 1687

Kudos [?]: 13524 [0], given: 1905

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 09:49
thangvietnam wrote:
what is difference among

law requiring
law to requie
law for requiring

pls, help

last-week-local-shrimpers-held-a-news-conference-to-take-76039-20.html#p1122687
_________________
Intern
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 41
Location: United States
Concentration: Operations, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15, NUS '16
GMAT Date: 08-27-2013
GPA: 3.46
WE: Project Management (Other)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 54

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 03:21
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws[/u] requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.[/u]

Here in this SC we have three clauses.Every clause must have a subject and working verb.
clauses

1.Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying - non underlined part.

2. that their compliance with laws requiring - here some part is correct some part is wrong.The error in this clause is that SV agreement.In this clause subject is "compliance" a singular subject ( "laws" is not a subject because it is preceded by a preposition).Singular subject requires a singular working verb which is absent in the clause.

3. that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles - underlined portion of SC.Here subject is "turtles- excluder devices" is plural subject requires plural verb.Here the verb is "protect" is plural.So the SV agreement is correct.

POE of choices.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect-- if we chose this option the second clause goes wrong with SV agreement.Incorrect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting-- here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed forming a single clause.In this clause subject is "compliance" the verb "is" singular.SO correct
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect--same error as A.Incorrect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting--here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed forming a single clause.In this clause subject is "compliance" which is singular and but the verb "are" plural.So Incorrect]
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting-- Here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed but clause lacks working verb."protecting " is a gerund. Incorrect

Note- If my explanation is wrong please correct me.Feedback is always appreciated.
_________________

.........................................................................................
Please give me kudos if my posts help.

Intern
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 41
Location: United States
Concentration: Operations, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15, NUS '16
GMAT Date: 08-27-2013
GPA: 3.46
WE: Project Management (Other)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 54

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 03:51
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws[/u] requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.[/u]

Here in this SC we have three clauses.Every clause must have a subject and working verb.
clauses

1.Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying - non underlined part.

2. that their compliance with laws requiring - here some part is correct some part is wrong.The error in this clause is that SV agreement.In this clause subject is "compliance" a singular subject ( "laws" is not a subject because it is preceded by a preposition).Singular subject requires a singular working verb which is absent in the clause.

3. that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles - underlined portion of SC.Here subject is "turtles- excluder devices" is plural subject requires plural verb.Here the verb is "protect" is plural.So the SV agreement is correct.

POE of choices.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect-- if we chose this option the second clause goes wrong with SV agreement.Incorrect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting-- here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed forming a single clause.In this clause subject is "compliance" the verb "is" singular.SO correct
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect--same error as A.Incorrect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting--here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed forming a single clause.In this clause subject is "compliance" which is singular and but the verb "are" plural.So Incorrect]
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting-- Here 2 and 3 clauses are clubbed but clause lacks working verb."protecting " is a gerund. Incorrect

Note- If my explanation is wrong please correct me.Feedback is always appreciated.
_________________

.........................................................................................
Please give me kudos if my posts help.

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3830
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 817

Kudos [?]: 6311 [0], given: 324

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 04:37
IMO, this is an ‘open and shut’ case involving S-V matching . Limiting just to the underline part, we may see that the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by ‘ that ‘ is compliance, a simple singular noun and therefore its verb should be matching with yet again a singular . You have the singular specification only in B and E; In E, ‘laws to require’ is unidiomatic while ‘laws requiring’ is the custom usage. So E. any hitch?
_________________

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 336
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 196

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 4

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 05:56
Hi Daagh,

Totally agree with you on S/V - leaving us with B or E.

However I would say that 'laws requiring' is the correct phrase. I can't say I have any idiom table that refutes your point, but it just sounds awful to my eat the other way, and it's not an idiom I've come accross
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 3830
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 817

Kudos [?]: 6311 [0], given: 324

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 06:00
sorry plumber250 ; I meant to write E is out and B is eventually ; Yes E is terrible . That is what I have said in the explanation before my final sentence,; it ia typo
_________________

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 336
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 196

Kudos [?]: 384 [0], given: 4

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 06:07
You absolutely do. Sorry - I did not read your post properly.

Apologies all around!
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 433
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 70

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 06:11
All duplicate threads on this topic have been merged.

Please read and follow the Guidelines for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum before posting anything.
Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2012
Posts: 115
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 57

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 19:53
My 2 cents

compliance is usually used as - My compliance with the state law ensures that no harm is done. ( Singular format )

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

A,C are out because of the singular use of compliance.
"laws to require" is unidiomatic. "laws that require" is more meaningful. This eliminates D and E

B seems to be a good choice although it has -ing usage in 3 places.
Intern
Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 38
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 245

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2013, 10:59
daagh wrote:
IMO, this is an ‘open and shut’ case involving S-V matching . Limiting just to the underline part, we may see that the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by ‘ that ‘ is compliance, a simple singular noun and therefore its verb should be matching with yet again a singular . You have the singular specification only in B and E; In E, ‘laws to require’ is unidiomatic while ‘laws requiring’ is the custom usage. So E. any hitch?

cant the plural pronoun 'their' be used as the subject of the 2nd clause, making me select option D. im confused here.
Manager
Status: Prep Mode
Joined: 25 Apr 2012
Posts: 163
Location: India
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 159 [0], given: 69

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2013, 11:34
saggii27 wrote:
daagh wrote:
IMO, this is an ‘open and shut’ case involving S-V matching . Limiting just to the underline part, we may see that the subject of the subordinate clause introduced by ‘ that ‘ is compliance, a simple singular noun and therefore its verb should be matching with yet again a singular . You have the singular specification only in B and E; In E, ‘laws to require’ is unidiomatic while ‘laws requiring’ is the custom usage. So E. any hitch?

cant the plural pronoun 'their' be used as the subject of the 2nd clause, making me select option D. im confused here.

Whenever in doubt regarding the subject of the clause, figure out the verb and then check who is modifying this verb.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

B: requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
D: to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting

So, the Verb Tense is Present Continuous "is protecting" or "are protecting" ? Now, ask this question to yourself, who is actually the doer of the action i.e. what is protecting adult sea turtles.

Is it Their(shrimpers) or the Compliance (with laws) ???

It has to be the compliance which is protecting adult sea turtles.Thus, the subject of the clause is compliance and not their. Hope it helps.
Manager
Status: Please do not forget to give kudos if you like my post
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 122
Location: United States (CA)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 257

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Oct 2013, 13:35
B for me.

Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

just scan the answer choices.

A. requiring....protect --> wrong ||sms
B. requiring..protecting..keep ---> "saying that their compliance with laws requiring turtle-excluder devices" is concise.
C. require...protect...keep ---> "saying that their compliance with laws that require turtle-excluder devices" is too wordy
D. require...protecting --> wrong ||sms
E. requite..protecting --> wrong ||sms
_________________

[Reveal] Spoiler:

Manager
Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 220
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 47

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2014, 11:27
nevergiveup wrote:
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

I got this one wrong because I was too quick, here's the breakdown though:

A) we need s-v agreement: compliance is our subject, so we need a singular verb. Protect is plural, A is gone
B) "Is" is a correct verb to use with compliance, so B is correct.
C) protect is incorrect. C is gone
D) are is incorrect, D is gone
E) the infinitive form "to require" is wrong and awkward. The present participle requiring implies we have a present requirement, which is the intended meaning of the author.

Therefore, B is correct
Current Student
Joined: 06 Mar 2014
Posts: 275
Location: India
GMAT Date: 04-30-2015
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 84

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2014, 15:19
x2suresh wrote:
eileen1017 wrote:
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit for the resurgence of the rare Kemp's ridley turtle, saying that their compliance with laws requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect adult sea turtles.

A. requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp nets protect
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting

try to find the main subject and verb here..

Main subject : compliance

complicance... protect adult sea turtles
Sub- Verb Problem

A,C -- > are out.

complicance...are protecting adult sea turtles
D -->out

between B and E

"laws to require" is not idiomatic

B is better.

Subject + Verb should make sense.
So Compliance (Subject) ....is protecting (verb) does not really make sense here.
Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2015
Posts: 58
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 89

Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2015, 12:45
here are my 2 cents

This statement is a "cause and effect" statement. So it requires -ing verb. This eliminates A & C .
to protect doesn't work here. we can eliminate D & E based on this.

Only B remains...
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take   [#permalink] 03 Sep 2015, 12:45

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 93 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
9 In a press conference last year, an ecologist announced that successfu 3 11 Jul 2016, 04:04
1 *Fresh* Last year, engineers at a local software 3 30 Jul 2014, 02:01
Last week, local activists held a news conference 2 29 Jul 2013, 20:15
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take 0 04 May 2013, 06:07
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take 0 10 Oct 2012, 00:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take

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

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO 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®.