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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Want to score 90 percentile or higher on GMAT CR? Attend this free webinar to learn how to pre-think assumptions and solve the most challenging questions in less than 2 minutes.
Want to solve 700+ level Algebra questions within 2 minutes? Attend this free webinar to learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Values questions in GMAT
Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 23 Oct 2018, 01:34
39
1
331
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
65% (hard)
Question Stats:
54% (01:29) correct 46% (01:35) wrong based on 8438 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
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
Dean M. Wilkinson, wildlife legislative director for Greenpeace, an environmental group, did not dispute that. ''Each shrimp boat probably doesn't catch more than a few turtles a year,'' he said. ''But when you spread that out across a 17,000-boat fleet, it adds up to big numbers. And we're talking about animals that are on the edge of extinction.''
Environmentalists estimate the total number of Kemp's ridleys at not more than 10,000, including less than 600 nesting females.
Mr. Wilkinson said that the protest over the use of the devices was based largely on misinformation. He said that an earlier design for these turtle excluder devices was bulky and did decimate the shrimp catch, but added, ''There are now 300 boats using TED's and they say it's not hurting them.''
Tee John Mialjevich, a Louisiana shrimper who is a protest leader, said that should a law requiring the use of devices be enacted, he and many other fishermen would disobey it.
The Vietnamese shrimpers, however, said they were not certain they would participate in an illegal protest. ''We don't know yet what we'd do,'' Mr. Huy said. ''We'd have to see. But now we are doing this, which we are allowed to do.''
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2012, 11:27
45
29
Concept tested: SV agreement, Meaning. Difficulty level: High Illustration: This question tests a very important aspect of meaning. First, we know that the main verb in the underlined portion “protect” is wrong as the main subject “compliance is singular. (Note that protect is not being used as a command subjunctive in A. “be” is used as the command subjunctive). According to this logic, A and C are wrong. Now among B, D and E, “to require” indicates purpose of the law which is not the intended meaning (please refer to the tip below). So, D and E are incorrect. B is the correct answer.
Tip: “Laws to require” indicates purpose of the law, but “laws requiring indicates contents of the law. While this might sound very obvious to natives, but non natives might have to struggle to get this clearly. Consider the following examples. 1.Arms act is passed to discourage random public shootings. Correct 2.Arms act is passed to levy heavy fines on people who carry unlicensed firearm. Wrong.
2 is wrong because the arms act is not issued to levy fines. It is issued to prevent something by levying fines. So the correct option is B.
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Feb 2009, 07:50
39
18
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
Please explain your answers. Thanks.
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
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 May 2009, 18:55
1
1
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 --> the whole modifier requiring that turtle-excluder devices be on shrimp is too wordy to modify for laws, single noun their compliance is not suitable with protect B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting -->the best: requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is a more simple participle phrase modifier for laws than that of A. Besides, is protecting is compliant with their compliance C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect -->same error of A D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting -->to + Inf here does not clearly modify for which Noun and betterly idiomatically modifies for another to + inf than a Noun. Also, are protecting is grammatical incorrect with their compliance E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting -->same error of D
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 17 Jul 2009, 07:03
2
1
bigoyal 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 (singular)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
Note: 'protect' needs the verb form for the subject 'compliance', so should be protects.
A, C, D are gone D and E are gone for the "to require", which is incorrect.
Only B left
I think that is correct in A, only verb form of protect is incorrect.
Originally posted by sudeep on 17 Jul 2009, 03:24.
Last edited by sudeep on 17 Jul 2009, 07:03, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Feb 2010, 13:49
1
6
gurpreetsingh wrote:
IMO E
a and b not possible....wrongly used verb between d n e....d not possible, is should be used instead of are
i m not sure about c but it lacks parallelism,
m quite weak in SC, so guys pls throw some input.
We have subject/verb agreement error (A), (C) and (D). Subject of the clause is "their compliance" - so verb should be in singular form; "protect" and "are protecting" are wrong
It leaves us with (B) and (E). Here the major problem is to choose the correct idiom: whether "laws requiring . . " or "laws to require . . ".
I consider "laws requiring" idiomatic and hence prefer (B).
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Jul 2010, 08:32
2
1
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 - 'protect' is wrong. 'compliance' protects or is protecting (B) requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting - saying, requiring, protecting (C) that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect - 'protect' is wrong. 'compliance' protects or is protecting (D) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting - 'compliance' is singular. Hence we need 'is protecting'...'are' is incorrect. 'to require' is incorrect here. (E) to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting - 'to require' is incorrect here.
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Mar 2011, 20:37
1
ajit257 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
Can someone explain this sc better
"Laws to requiere" is unidiomatic, eliminate (D) and (E)
The noun phrase "their compliace" is the acting subject of the verb "to protect", therefore there must be a subject-verb agreement between them.
(A) Their compliance... protect // Their compliance is singular, protect is in the plural form, eliminate (A) (B) Their compliance... is protecting // Both subject and verb are in singular form, (B) is the correct choice (C) Their compliance... protect // Their compliance is singular, protect is in the plural form, eliminate (C)
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Mar 2011, 00:16
2
3
garimavyas wrote:
ajit257 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
Can someone explain this sc better
From my notes Hope it will be helpful. Be sure to use ing form immediately after a legal noun used in objective case Legal noun are law , ban , order, decree, contract , bill, Deed etc. example : GMAT enacted a ban prohibiting takers from posting live questions.
Ban is the object However, if the legal noun is used as subject of the clause then it might be appropriate to use subjunctive form The law requires that he perform well in GMAT. Law is the subject Let us consider the above problem Laws is objective case and hence requires Ing form
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
18 Sep 2012, 08:06
7
3
"laws to require..." isn't a correct idiom if you're discussing the actual text of the laws themselves. if you were discussing the ultimate purpose of those laws, then this could be idiomatic. examples: laws specifying long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> correct (___ing), since that's what the laws actually specify. laws to specify long jail sentences for drunk drivers --> incorrect (that's not the ultimate purpose of the laws) laws to discourage drunk driving --> correct (this IS actually the ultimate purpose of the laws)
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2012, 11:15
3
souvik101990 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 sentence fragment 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
The best way to solve is look for subject-verb agreement. complaince should have singular verb thus we have only b and e left. E makes no sense as the use of infinitive is wrong. Thus B must be the answer
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 May 2013, 04:12
6
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?
_________________
Are you stuck around 630? If you can't pole-vault above 630, spare 30 hours and you can fly on top. "Winners never quit and quitters never win". (+919884544509), <newnaren@gmail.com>
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#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
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#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
_________________
Are you stuck around 630? If you can't pole-vault above 630, spare 30 hours and you can fly on top. "Winners never quit and quitters never win". (+919884544509), <newnaren@gmail.com>
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 May 2017, 14:53
1
1
nevergiveup wrote:
OG16 SC134 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
Please explain your answers. Thanks.
A S/V do not agree in number. B Correct. C S/V do not agree in number. D S/V do not agree in number. E "To require" is incorrect because the infinitive of purpose does not make sense. The ultimate goal of the law is not "to require" but rather "to protect." The requirement is merely a byproduct of the law.
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Jun 2017, 07:12
Hi sayantan2ck, I know you were trying to explain different concept here but from subject verb agreement point of view i think protects should be used in Eg 2 and eg 3. Also let me know what do you call compliance in grammatical terms? Is it a noun? I haven't seen much pronoun together with noun placed adjacently as in option A. Let me know if structure wise the sentence is correct other than SV no agreement in option A in OG. WR, Arpit
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Jun 2017, 14:09
1
adkikani wrote:
Hi sayantan2ck, ...let me know what do you call compliance in grammatical terms? Is it a noun? I haven't seen much pronoun together with noun placed adjacently as in option A. Let me know if structure wise the sentence is correct other than SV no agreement in option A in OG. WR, Arpit
The word compliance indeed is a noun. That is the reason why it can act as a subject in a clause.
Also, there is no issue in the expression of their compliance in Choice A. The pronoun their acts as a possessive pronoun that is followed by a noun. For example: my pen, your car, his project, her recipe, etc.
In Choice A, their compliance stands for the local shrimpers' compliance. Hence, choice A only one error - the Subject-Verb number disagreement error.
Hope this helps. Thanks. Shraddha
_________________
Re: Last week local shrimpers held a news conference to take some credit
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Jun 2017, 06:53
1
OG16 SC134 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 plural verb "protect" is not in agreement with the singular subject "compliance"
B. requiring turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting Correct Choice
C. that require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets protect Same Error as A
D. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets are protecting Two issues here First: "Laws to require..." it says laws are created in order to require TE devices on shrimps...which is pretty awkward.. it should saying that Laws require that the TE devices be on Shrimps Second : "are" protecting - needs to be "is" protecting
E. to require turtle-excluder devices on shrimp nets is protecting Error one mentioned in Option D is killing this one as well _________________
close
54% (01:29) correct 
