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.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
16 Sep 2014, 01:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
Unfortunately for the commuters who lost their lives when the bridge collapsed, the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he had been questioned about the structure’s weight-bearing abilities.
A. was not honest
B. was not
C. was honest
D. had not been honest
E. had not been being honest
A. was not honest
B. was not
C. was honest
D. had not been honest
E. had not been being honest
16 Sep 2014, 01:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Unfortunately for the commuters who lost their lives when the bridge collapsed, the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he had been questioned about the structure’s weight-bearing abilities.
A. was not honest
B. was not
C. was honest
D. had not been honest
E. had not been being honest
This sentence requires past perfect verb form to indicate that the engineer’s dishonesty occurred at a definite point in the past. The point in the past is indicated by the phrase at the preliminary safety hearing.
Answer: D
Unfortunately for the commuters who lost their lives when the bridge collapsed, the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he had been questioned about the structure’s weight-bearing abilities.
A. was not honest
B. was not
C. was honest
D. had not been honest
E. had not been being honest
This sentence requires past perfect verb form to indicate that the engineer’s dishonesty occurred at a definite point in the past. The point in the past is indicated by the phrase at the preliminary safety hearing.
- Was not honest is past tense, not past perfect, and does not sufficiently indicate the order of events discussed in the sentence.
- The word honest is missing from this answer choice, changing the meaning of the sentence.
- This answer choice is the opposite meaning of the underlined portion.
- The words had not been honest correctly indicate past perfect tense and demonstrate that the engineer’s dishonesty occurred at a definite point in the past.
- The word being is redundant and unnecessary.
Answer: D
anubhavmax
Joined: 01 Feb 2013
Last visit: 25 May 2016
Posts: 106
Given Kudos: 26
Location: India
Schools: Anderson '18 (M)
07 Oct 2014, 10:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
As per my knowledge, Verb sequencing for two related events in the past occurs as follows.
Earlier event - past perfect
Later event - simple past
Later event is engineer answered and was not honest.
Earlier event is engineer was questioned.
As per this "the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he had been questioned about the structure’s weight-bearing abilities."
But since the other part is not - underlined, assuming questioning and answering happened at the same instant, simple past for both would do. But as per OA, the sequence is reversed. The engineer was not honest in answering first and was questioned later. Clearly this doesn't make sense.
Can someone explain where am I going wrong on this?
Earlier event - past perfect
Later event - simple past
Later event is engineer answered and was not honest.
Earlier event is engineer was questioned.
As per this "the engineer was not honest at the preliminary public safety commission hearing, when he had been questioned about the structure’s weight-bearing abilities."
But since the other part is not - underlined, assuming questioning and answering happened at the same instant, simple past for both would do. But as per OA, the sequence is reversed. The engineer was not honest in answering first and was questioned later. Clearly this doesn't make sense.
Can someone explain where am I going wrong on this?
