GMAT Changed on April 16th - Read about the latest changes here

It is currently 23 Apr 2018, 02:09

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

New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show

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

Hide Tags

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3226
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Sep 2016, 09:24
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
vaidhaichaturvedi wrote:
Hello,

Could you please tell me
it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish[/u] big fires.

what is subject of That clause here as I think every clause has its own subject and verb pair.

Thank you



"That" itself is the subject and "would be spent" is the verb (passive voice). For any relative clause, the relative pronoun itself that starts the clause ("which", "who", "that" etc.) is the subject.
Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 873
Location: Bangalore, India
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Sep 2016, 10:05
vaidhaichaturvedi wrote:
Could you please tell me
it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish[/u] big fires.

what is subject of That clause here as I think every clause has its own subject and verb pair.

Hi vaidhai, perhaps what's confusing you is the role that that is playing in this sentence. For example:

Jack said that he would work hard.

Here, Jack and he serve as subjects for their respective clauses, with that being a conjunction.

However, in the sentence under consideration, that is not used as a conjunction, but as a relative pronoun. An example:

Peter bought a car that is very expensive.

Here that is used as a relative pronoun, and in this case, is the subject for the verb is.

By the way, apart from the above two usages, that can also be used as a demonstrative pronoun. A good understanding of the various usages of that is important for SC.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses the various 'avatars' of 'that' , its application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________

Thanks,
Ashish
EducationAisle, Bangalore

Sentence Correction Nirvana available at Amazon.in and Flipkart

Now! Preview the entire Grammar Section of Sentence Correction Nirvana at pothi.com

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 977
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.5
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2017, 15:52
daagh wrote:
Let’s decode the structural jumble of the sentence by patiently parsing it.

New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show ---- This is the main clause

That –the subordinate conjunction introducing the 1st sub-ordinate clause.

for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel; this in fact
is the subject of sub- clause with its essential modifiers starting with the past participle -----spent ---

‘It’ saves seven dollars; saves is in fact the verb of the subordinate clause. But even before this verb can take its right royal role, there is an intervening pronoun ‘it’, which is redundant and corrupts the structure of the entire sentence.

that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires. This is another sub- clause modifying the object ' the seven dollars'. In fact, the object ‘seven dollars’ turns as the subject of this modifying clause.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish ------- We can simply reject A on grounds of the intruding and redundant pronoun ‘it’. Meaning of the modifier clause is not clear as to how one can save something that he might have be spending at all. .

(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing --- This choice is fitting into the grove smugly. The subject matches its verb in the subordinate clause with perfect //ism and the meaning of the modifying clause is simple and straight. The best choice

(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish – that for every dollar saves seven dollars does not make much meaning. ---- For every dollar spent --- should be followed by a passive voice structure such as ---seven dollars are saved. ---

(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish --- a reported fact such as in this case, should be necessarily introduced by a connector such as ‘that’ ; secondly it is weird to think that you save something you would be spending.

(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing – same problems as in D



Hello daagh - Please pardon my lack of understanding here, I am unable to understand the explanation you gave for option D and E. Specifically for the usage of "that".

I even tried to read the official explanation, which says - "That introduces a subordinate rather than main clause, making a sentence fragment; it has no referent; not having to extinguish is wordy and awkward." For D & "Introductory that makes a sentence fragment; that would not have been spent on extinguishing is awkward and illogical." For E, but I am not clear with this explanation as well.

Appreciate if you can throw some light on this.

GMATNinja - Could you please help in clarifying why D and E are not the correct answer choices? I am specifically not clear on the usage of the word "that" which is highlighted by other experts as the reason of these options being incorrect.
_________________

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."

Best AWA Template: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html#p470475

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 977
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.5
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2017, 02:56
Hello - Please pardon my lack of understanding here, I am unable to understand the explanation Dagh gave for option D and E. Specifically for the usage of "that".

I even tried to read the official explanation, which says - "That introduces a subordinate rather than main clause, making a sentence fragment; it has no referent; not having to extinguish is wordy and awkward." For D & "Introductory that makes a sentence fragment; that would not have been spent on extinguishing is awkward and illogical." For E, but I am not clear with this explanation as well.

Appreciate if you can throw some light on this.
_________________

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."

Best AWA Template: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html#p470475

Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1593
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2017, 09:12
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
ydmuley wrote:
Hello - Please pardon my lack of understanding here, I am unable to understand the explanation Dagh gave for option D and E. Specifically for the usage of "that".

I even tried to read the official explanation, which says - "That introduces a subordinate rather than main clause, making a sentence fragment; it has no referent; not having to extinguish is wordy and awkward." For D & "Introductory that makes a sentence fragment; that would not have been spent on extinguishing is awkward and illogical." For E, but I am not clear with this explanation as well.

Appreciate if you can throw some light on this.


Yeah... I'm not sure that I have any idea what, exactly, they're trying to say on those official explanations. They aren't exactly the greatest. :?

There's a good reason why (D) and (E) are wrong, but it's not particularly mechanical, and it's definitely not easy to explain. I'll give it a shot, though.

Consider these two sentences:

    1) For every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.
    2) For every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, that he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.

There's absolutely no good reason to include the word "that" in the second sentence, right? It just creates a mess. Maybe we could come up with some jargon-filled explanation for why #2 is wrong, but I can't really understand what "that" is trying to do in #2. (If you're not clear about the potential uses of "that" on the GMAT, you might consider taking a look at this article.)

We could make the sentence a little bit more complicated, but it wouldn't change anything we just said about the use of "that" in sentence #2:

    3) New data shows that for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.
    4) New data shows that for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, that he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.

We might be tempted to hallucinate some parallelism in #4, but there's no real justification for it, since there's no parallelism trigger ("and" or "or" would be the most obvious examples). The first "that" just subordinates a clause, and tells us what the data shows. And the data is telling us that entire phrase: "for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala." Why would we try to chop up that phrase with a 2nd "that", as in sentence #4?

That's the heart of the problem with (D) and (E) in the Forest Service question. The original question is just wordier than my little example. :)

Does that help at all?
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | 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 -- Wednesdays, February 14 - April 4!

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 and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

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

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Jun 2016
Posts: 133
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2017, 09:28
1
This post received
KUDOS
blueseas wrote:
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish
(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing
(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 36
Page: 40
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:


==
Hi ,
i have a doubt regarding the sub-verb agreement in the non underlined portion.
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show
as per my thinking SUBJECT :NEW DATA(SINGULAR)..............VERB: SHOW(PLURAL)===>How is this working a plural verb with a singular subject?
please correct where i am wrong?

thanks

In case it helps someone.
Data is plural.
Datum is singular.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2017
Posts: 18
Schools: Boston U '20
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2017, 09:35
I Think B is correct :arrow:

In B, extinguishing" is modifying " seven dollars".

The relative clause is providing additional information about that money.
1 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 977
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.5
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2017, 10:00
1
This post received
KUDOS
GMATNinja wrote:
ydmuley wrote:
Hello - Please pardon my lack of understanding here, I am unable to understand the explanation Dagh gave for option D and E. Specifically for the usage of "that".

I even tried to read the official explanation, which says - "That introduces a subordinate rather than main clause, making a sentence fragment; it has no referent; not having to extinguish is wordy and awkward." For D & "Introductory that makes a sentence fragment; that would not have been spent on extinguishing is awkward and illogical." For E, but I am not clear with this explanation as well.

Appreciate if you can throw some light on this.


Yeah... I'm not sure that I have any idea what, exactly, they're trying to say on those official explanations. They aren't exactly the greatest. :?

There's a good reason why (D) and (E) are wrong, but it's not particularly mechanical, and it's definitely not easy to explain. I'll give it a shot, though.

Consider these two sentences:

    1) For every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.
    2) For every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, that he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.

There's absolutely no good reason to include the word "that" in the second sentence, right? It just creates a mess. Maybe we could come up with some jargon-filled explanation for why #2 is wrong, but I can't really understand what "that" is trying to do in #2. (If you're not clear about the potential uses of "that" on the GMAT, you might consider taking a look at this article.)

We could make the sentence a little bit more complicated, but it wouldn't change anything we just said about the use of "that" in sentence #2:

    3) New data shows that for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.
    4) New data shows that for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, that he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala.

We might be tempted to hallucinate some parallelism in #4, but there's no real justification for it, since there's no parallelism trigger ("and" or "or" would be the most obvious examples). The first "that" just subordinates a clause, and tells us what the data shows. And the data is telling us that entire phrase: "for every $100 Charles earns as a GMAT tutor, he spends $99 on burritos and bhindi masala." Why would we try to chop up that phrase with a 2nd "that", as in sentence #4?

That's the heart of the problem with (D) and (E) in the Forest Service question. The original question is just wordier than my little example. :)

Does that help at all?


Thanks, GMATNinja for your prompt response. I kind of get it now, "that" is redundant in both of these sentences and B provides a better answer choice when compared with both of them. I think GMAC loves to play around with this word "that". Your supplimentary article was also great!
_________________

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."

Best AWA Template: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html#p470475

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 977
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.5
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2017, 11:14
sevenplusplus wrote:
blueseas wrote:
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish
(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing
(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 36
Page: 40
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:


==
Hi ,
i have a doubt regarding the sub-verb agreement in the non underlined portion.
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show
as per my thinking SUBJECT :NEW DATA(SINGULAR)..............VERB: SHOW(PLURAL)===>How is this working a plural verb with a singular subject?
please correct where i am wrong?

thanks

In case it helps someone.
Data is plural.
Datum is singular.


sevenplusplus appreciate the point that you highlighted, though the verb "show" was not underlined here, it is natural for someone who is not aware that data is "plural" and "datum" is singular.... Great Job
_________________

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not: the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."

Best AWA Template: https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html#p470475

Mannheim Thread Master
User avatar
S
Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 261
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Sep 2017, 10:38
B is Correct - The sentence properly uses seven dollars as the subject of the clause to balance every dollar in the introductory phrase.
_________________

2017-2018 MBA Deadlines

Threadmaster for B-school Discussions
Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Posts: 1
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jan 2018, 19:54
Hi.

I don't know if anyone is still on this post but if you are, can you explain to me the parallelism in the question. It says, "controlled small -scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel." "the training of fire-management personnel," seems incorrect to me because it is the only part of the list that begins with "the."

Is the sentence still parallel adding words to it at the beginning or does it only matter that all these words have a verb with "-ing." In other sentences, I have the feeling that most words are parallel from the beginning.

Advice would be much appreciated. Thanks.
Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1593
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jan 2018, 20:14
WorthPursuit wrote:
Hi.

I don't know if anyone is still on this post but if you are, can you explain to me the parallelism in the question. It says, "controlled small -scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel." "the training of fire-management personnel," seems incorrect to me because it is the only part of the list that begins with "the."

Is the sentence still parallel adding words to it at the beginning or does it only matter that all these words have a verb with "-ing." In other sentences, I have the feeling that most words are parallel from the beginning.

Advice would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Don't worry: GMAT Club posts live forever. :)

Your question about parallelism is a darned good one, and the answer is actually a little bit complicated. I think there are two things that are key here: first, parallelism isn't a purely rigid, mechanical thing. You need sentences to be parallel ENOUGH to convey the intended meaning accurately, but there's more wiggle-room than we like to think sometimes.

And the second thing is that the same structure appears in all five answer choices, so the GMAT is openly begging you not to worry about it in this particular case. :-)

But back to the first thing. Consider these two sentences:

  • I ate eggs and ham last week. -- This is the most boring parallelism I could think of: "I ate (noun) and (noun)..." Fine, right?
  • I ate eggs and green ham last week. -- If you're too mechanical with the parallelism, you might think that this is wrong: "I ate (noun) and (adjective noun)..." But the essence is still fine: I ate two foods. Those foods are parallel. So it's not a problem.

The same general concept applies to the OG question above. In the phrase "controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel", we still have three gerunds (nouns ending in "-ing") as the heart of the parallel list. Personally, I agree with you: this would probably be nicer if it said "training fire-management personnel", but I don't think it's a horrible thing to stick the article in there in this case. The essence of the list is still intact -- and we don't have any other options, anyway.

But you're smart to notice this sort of thing: sometimes, the GMAT does seem to prefer lists that have articles attached to all three nouns if there's a compelling reason to include them. Here's an example that you might find interesting: https://gmatclub.com/forum/building-on- ... 30798.html.

I hope this helps, and welcome to GMAT Club!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | 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 -- Wednesdays, February 14 - April 4!

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 and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

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

Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show   [#permalink] 15 Jan 2018, 20:14

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 32 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show

  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®.