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

It is currently 18 Jun 2019, 00:10

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

Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a

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

Hide Tags

 
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2852
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Dec 2017, 12:41
2
1
SidJainGMAT wrote:
Hello Verbal Experts,

The OA here is D. But, I am not convinced with it.

The idiom used here is X instead of Y, where X and Y both must be parallel.

Here in this option: to contribute $330 a year toward the cost of higher education, instead of the $7 per year required previously
X=$330 a year
Y=the $7 per year


Is the word 'the' before $7 creating a problem and violating parallelism?

Please let me know.

Thanks in advance! :-)




Hello SidJainGMAT,


I would be glad to help you out with this one. :-)


There is no parallelism issue in the correct answer choice.

X=$330 a year
Y=the $7 per year

Please note that both the entities are noun phrases. Usage of the article the before the second element does not violate the parallelism in any way.

The elements must have the same role in the sentence to qualify as grammatically parallel elements in the list. They need not be completely identical.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Nov 2018
Posts: 79
Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jan 2019, 18:25
sayantanc2k wrote:
Yet one could also say "previously 7 dollar," isn't it?

I think "previously $7 per year" sentence is grammatically correct but suffers from meaning issues.

For example, I'm pretty sure all of the following sentences are grammatically correct, but all have different meanings:

The students are required to drive the blue car, rather than the red car.
-- The only thing we know about the non-blue car is that it is red.

The students are required to drive the blue car, rather than the previously red car.
-- We know that the non-blue car was previously red, but we don't know what color it is now. Also, we don't know if it was required before. The meaning of this sentence is probably not the meaning that we intended. Also, this sentence is really awkward.

The students are required to drive the blue car, rather than the previous red car.
-- The non-blue car is a red car that was either previously seen, previously required, or previously something else. This is close, but still not what we want.

The students are required to drive the blue car, rather than the red car required previously.
-- We know that the non-blue car is red and that it was required previously. This is the sentence that we want.

Another example:

The students are required to wear a blue shirt, rather than the red shirt.
-- The non-blue shirt is red.

The students are required to wear a blue shirt, rather than the previously red shirt.
-- The non-blue shirt was previously red, but we don't know what color it is now.

The students are required to wear a blue shirt, rather than the previous red shirt.
-- The non-blue shirt is red and it was either previously seen, previously required, or previously something else. This is close, but still not quite what we want.

The students are required to wear a blue shirt, rather than the red shirt required previously.
-- The non-blue shirt is red and was required previously.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Nov 2018
Posts: 79
Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jan 2019, 11:05
1
Quote:
A. year toward the cost of higher education, previously paying $7 per year

anairamitch1804 has a good explanation for why this option is wrong. In this option, it seems that the students are protesting while they are also previously paying $7 per year. Actions can't happen simultaneously if one of those actions happened previously.

Also, it's not clear what they were previously paying $7 per year for. In other options its clear that the $7 per year is in place of the $330 per year.

Finally, some people have pointed out that "paying" could either be modifying "students" or "law". As demonstrated in this question, "paying" could modify either "students" or "law". However, this would introduce only slight ambiguity. So slight that I don't think that this ambiguity alone would be enough to rule out (A).

Quote:
B. year toward the cost of higher education, for which was previously paid $7 per year

This option is actually not grammatical. The relative which clause has no subject. The clause can be read like this:
For [the cost of higher education] (blank subject) was previously paid $7 per year
Or like this:
(Blank subject) was previously paid $7 per year for [the cost of higher education]

Quote:
C. year, compared to the previously $7 per year, toward the cost of higher education

"Compared to" is not the same as "instead of" or "as opposed to". Thus, "compared to" changes the meaning of the sentence and we don't know that the $330/yr has been substituted for the $7/yr. We only know that they are compared.

Also, "previously $7 per year" is grammatically correct but gives the sentence a different meaning than the one we intend. See my previous post for a more in-depth explanation.

Quote:
D. year toward the cost of higher education, instead of the $7 per year required previously

This sentence looks good

Quote:
E. year as opposed to the $7 per year required previously for the cost of higher education

I think this one is pretty close to the right answer, but it seems to be inferior to choice (D).

"toward" is a little more exact than "for", but I think only slightly. I personally wouldn't eliminate (E) on that alone.

I think the most important issue with this option is that "as opposed to the $7 per year required previously" is not set off with commas. This really feels like a non-essential fragment. It doesn't the clarify the meaning of "$330 a year" and so I think it needs to be set off with commas. Grammarly calls these situations interrupters. Wiki calls them non-restrictive clauses.
I think this option would be much better if it instead read:
year, as opposed to the $7 per year required previously, for the cost of higher education

Finally, I'd like the "for the cost of higher education" to come before the "as opposed to...". I think this makes the sentence easier to read. In comparisons, we use ellipses quite a bit and I think the ellipses work better at the end of a clause - just like I think pronouns with antecedents are easier to read than pronouns with postcedents. Though, I wouldn't eliminate an option based on this alone.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Posts: 75
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2019, 02:42
Hi GMATNinja

Could you provide the explanation for this question?

Thank you.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2562
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2019, 11:37
1
ballest127 wrote:
Hi GMATNinja

Could you provide the explanation for this question?

Thank you.

There's a ton of discussion on this one already, including a short-but-sweet explanation from my long-lost brother @daagh, another really nice one right below it, and some thorough work from gmatman1031 right above your post. Let us know if those three don't resolve your doubts?
_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 737
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2019, 10:10
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 2755
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 17 May 2019, 08:52
thangvietnam wrote:
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
It could be more useful to look at instead of as acting as an adverb, but (about your question on prepositions in general) how do you define "connect"? For example, in the following phrase:

The page in the book... ← noun1, preposition (with its object, adjective for noun1), noun2 (object of the preposition)

We're not looking at a "connection" of the kind we'd get with something like and.

The page and the book... ← This one is different from the page in the book.

We really shouldn't be too concerned about seeing nouns on both sides of instead of. In general, after a preposition, it is perfectly normal for us to see a noun (or a gerund). This has very little to do with whether we see a noun before the instead of.

1. The notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer.
2. This summer, he will work at the local library instead of going on another overseas vacation.
3. This summer, he will work instead of going on another overseas vacation.
_________________

Originally posted by AjiteshArun on 13 May 2019, 21:18.
Last edited by AjiteshArun on 17 May 2019, 08:52, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 737
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2019, 21:40
AjiteshArun wrote:
thangvietnam wrote:
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
It could be more useful to look at instead of as acting as an adverb, but (about your question on prepositions in general) how do you define "connect"? For example, in the following phrase:

The page in the book... ← noun1, preposition (with its object, adjective for noun1), noun2 (object of the preposition)

We're not looking at a "connection" of the kind we'd get with something like and.

The page and the book... ← This one is different from the page in the book.

We really shouldn't be too concerned about seeing nouns on both sides of instead of. In general, after a preposition, it is perfectly normal for us to see a noun (or a gerund). This has very little to do with whether we see a noun before the instead of.

1. The notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer.
2. This summer, he will work at the local library instead of going an another overseas vacation.
3. This summer, he will work instead of going an another overseas vacation.


thank you for reply
I want to say that "instead of" is a preposition not a conjunction. Preposition+noun/doing can work as an adverb. conjunction connect 2 similar things, 2 verbs, 2 nouns, 2 adjectives...

"instead of" can not connect 2 similar things. there are many questions on gmatprep which test the difference between rather than, a conjunction, and instead of, a preposition.

instead of leaning French, I learn gmat

this is correct sentence.

so, in our problem, instead of connect 2 similar things, 330 usd and 7 usd. this is wrong. i am sorry to be frank. or I need help. pls, explain
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 737
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 May 2019, 21:43
AjiteshArun wrote:
thangvietnam wrote:
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
It could be more useful to look at instead of as acting as an adverb, but (about your question on prepositions in general) how do you define "connect"? For example, in the following phrase:

The page in the book... ← noun1, preposition (with its object, adjective for noun1), noun2 (object of the preposition)

We're not looking at a "connection" of the kind we'd get with something like and.

The page and the book... ← This one is different from the page in the book.

We really shouldn't be too concerned about seeing nouns on both sides of instead of. In general, after a preposition, it is perfectly normal for us to see a noun (or a gerund). This has very little to do with whether we see a noun before the instead of.

1. The notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer.
2. This summer, he will work at the local library instead of going an another overseas vacation.
3. This summer, he will work instead of going an another overseas vacation.


if I am correct
the sentence " the notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer " is wrong because "boss" and "lawer" is the similar things . only rather than can be used inhere.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 2755
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2019, 00:40
1
thangvietnam wrote:
so, in our problem, instead of connect 2 similar things, 330 usd and 7 usd. this is wrong. i am sorry to be frank. or I need help. pls, explain
It's (usually) good to be frank. :)

The problem here is that it's hard to see what you mean by the word "connect". If you are looking for the kind of "connect" that a conjunction provides, you won't find it with an instead of.

If you feel that a structure that includes a "noun + instead of + noun" is always wrong, then you'll have to add that structure to your "whitelist".
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Posts: 27
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 May 2019, 06:47
daagh wrote:
A says that the higher education was previously paying $7

B The phrase - for which was previously paid $7 per year - is too awkward to consider
In C - previously $7 per year - is grammatically wrong. Previously is an adverb and can not modify the noun of $7

D has no flaws as such and is the best answer.

E -as opposed to -is not the right idiom to describe comparison, unless the arms of the comparison are positioned opposite to the others physically? In a weird way, E may also give the feeling that the students were in fact opposed to the $7 per year.


Thanks for the clear and concise explanations that you always have to give! I always look for your note in every question!

Just want to have my doubt cleared:
Had C been this > year, compared to the previously $7 per year, toward the cost of higher education
'previous $7' instead of 'previously $7' then would C have been the correct choice?
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a   [#permalink] 29 May 2019, 06:47

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 51 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Most of Portugal's 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a

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


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