Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
81% (01:38) correct
19%
(01:56)
wrong
based on 4310
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
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
(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
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’.
(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
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’.
(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
09 Nov 2012, 00:57
Kudos
Bookmarks
Quote:
For option B, i have a question:
(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
why not using this: 'seven dollars that would have been spent on extinguishing are saved' ?
'seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing' is confusing,...never seen before. In this structure, 'That' relative clause (that would have been spent on extinguishing) is preceed by an independent clause (seven dollars are saved) ? Can someone explain ?
