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

 It is currently 22 May 2018, 04:54

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 554
GPA: 2.81
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2016, 15:26
5
KUDOS
46
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (00:55) correct 49% (01:02) wrong based on 1602 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Edit: This discussion has retired. Find the new thread HERE

The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2017

Practice Question
Question No.: SC 299
Page: 147

Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.

(A) it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some

(B) the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately

(C) the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some

(D) wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately

(E) wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

_________________

Md. Abdur Rakib

Please Press +1 Kudos,If it helps
Sentence Correction-Collection of Ron Purewal's "elliptical construction/analogies" for SC Challenges

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4670
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2016, 17:20
16
KUDOS
Expert's post
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
AbdurRakib wrote:
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

OG Verbal 2017 New Question (Book Question: 299)

Dear AbdurRakib,
I'm happy to respond.

First, let look at what happens after the last comma. We have an absolute phrase: the form of an absolute phrase is [noun] + [noun modifier]. As the name suggests, the absolute phrase stands on its own: it provides information for the whole of the attached sentence with modifying any particular work, and its grammatical structure is independent of the rest of the sentence. After the comma, we get the correct absolute phrase
some 11,000 of them to be found . . . .
The noun phrase is "some 11,000 of them," and here, the noun modifier is the passive infinitive "to be found." The absolute phrase is elegant. Rhetorically, it is a spineless mealy-mouthed move to replace this elegant structure with an awkward prepositional phrase "with approximately 11,000 of them to be found . . ." Technically, this is grammatically correct, but its a bit awkward and wordy, and it looks like a craven misfit compared to the absolute phrase.

Incidentally, the use of "some" in this context is as a synonym for "approximately." Other examples:
I read that book some fifteen years ago.
He ate some eight pieces of chicken that night.

This usage appears frequently in sophisticated English.

Now, what comes before that second comma. The phrasing "declined to an estimate of 200,000" is awkward and clumsy: both (C) & (D) use this and should be eliminated because of it.

Before the first comma, we have a modifying phrase "once numbering in the millions worldwide," and this phrase needs to touch the noun it modifies. The indirect structure in (A) delays the target noun in an awkward way, so (A) is incorrect.

This leaves (B) & (E). Choice (B) is passive and indirect and wordy, and has that awful preposition after the final comma. By contrast, (E) is powerful and direct:
. . . wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 . . .
The estimation part is simply about the size of the number, the mathematical details of the sentence: that's not where the main action is, so "estimate" or "is estimated" is should not be the main verb. The main action that happened in the real world is that "wolves have declined." That was the main action, and the main verb in the sentence should reflect the main action in the real world.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 42
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2016, 09:00
AbdurRakib wrote:
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

OG Verbal 2017 New Question (Book Question: 299)

I have seen three and now four different usages of estimate. Not sure which one to use where

1) The snake is estimated to be 30 ft long.
2) The length of snake is estimated at 30 ft.
3) The snake is measured 30 ft, an early estimate (I am not sure if this is correct one)
4) Measuring snake's length gives me an estimate of 30 ft

Can somebody confirm how to write option - 3 correctly ?

South City
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4670
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2016, 11:32
Expert's post
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
SouthCity wrote:
I have seen three and now four different usages of estimate. Not sure which one to use where

1) The snake is estimated to be 30 ft long.
2) The length of snake is estimated at 30 ft.
3) The snake is measured 30 ft, an early estimate (I am not sure if this is correct one)
4) Measuring snake's length gives me an estimate of 30 ft

Can somebody confirm how to write option - 3 correctly ?

South City

Dear South City,
I'm happy to respond.

All four are perfectly correct and could appear on the GMAT as correct constructions. If it's helpful, here are some GMAT Idiom Flashcards. Let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Retired Moderator
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Posts: 574
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2016, 13:25
mikemcgarry wrote:
AbdurRakib wrote:
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

OG Verbal 2017 New Question (Book Question: 299)

Dear AbdurRakib,
I'm happy to respond.

First, let look at what happens after the last comma. We have an absolute phrase: the form of an absolute phrase is [noun] + [noun modifier]. As the name suggests, the absolute phrase stands on its own: it provides information for the whole of the attached sentence with modifying any particular work, and its grammatical structure is independent of the rest of the sentence. After the comma, we get the correct absolute phrase
some 11,000 of them to be found . . . .
The noun phrase is "some 11,000 of them," and here, the noun modifier is the passive infinitive "to be found." The absolute phrase is elegant. Rhetorically, it is a spineless mealy-mouthed move to replace this elegant structure with an awkward prepositional phrase "with approximately 11,000 of them to be found . . ." Technically, this is grammatically correct, but its a bit awkward and wordy, and it looks like a craven misfit compared to the absolute phrase.

Incidentally, the use of "some" in this context is as a synonym for "approximately." Other examples:
I read that book some fifteen years ago.
He ate some eight pieces of chicken that night.

This usage appears frequently in sophisticated English.

Now, what comes before that second comma. The phrasing "declined to an estimate of 200,000" is awkward and clumsy: both (C) & (D) use this and should be eliminated because of it.

Before the first comma, we have a modifying phrase "once numbering in the millions worldwide," and this phrase needs to touch the noun it modifies. The indirect structure in (A) delays the target noun in an awkward way, so (A) is incorrect.

This leaves (B) & (E). Choice (B) is passive and indirect and wordy, and has that awful preposition after the final comma. By contrast, (E) is powerful and direct:
. . . wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 . . .
The estimation part is simply about the size of the number, the mathematical details of the sentence: that's not where the main action is, so "estimate" or "is estimated" is should not be the main verb. The main action that happened in the real world is that "wolves have declined." That was the main action, and the main verb in the sentence should reflect the main action in the real world.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Thanks for the explanation Mike. It takes (to read) at least 2-3 times, minimum, to understand your post given it is laded with so many terms. I had a query: Could we eliminate options B & C on the basis that second part of the sentence uses them (plural) and first part uses wolf (singular). My POE between D and E was estimate of 2L vs estimated 2L. Is the above reasoning correct?
Intern
Joined: 09 Apr 2016
Posts: 33
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Oct 2016, 06:13
1
KUDOS
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

How I tried to solve this (please correct if I am wrong):

A. the wolf has declined to 200,000 --> not the wolf, but the wolf population has declined to 200,000 we are not addressing a specific wolf. Also the modifier "once numbering in the millions worldwide" must logically relate to wolf
B. Similar to A. I think the phrase wolf population would be correct here
C. Similar to A and D.
D. wolves seem correct because it addresses all wolfs. But to an estimate of 200,000 sounds awkward like if the wolves have declined to an estimate
E. Seems correct
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4670
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Oct 2016, 21:04
warriorguy wrote:
Thanks for the explanation Mike. It takes (to read) at least 2-3 times, minimum, to understand your post given it is laded with so many terms. I had a query: Could we eliminate options B & C on the basis that second part of the sentence uses them (plural) and first part uses wolf (singular). My POE between D and E was estimate of 2L vs estimated 2L. Is the above reasoning correct?

Dear warriorguy,

I'm happy to respond.

As for your question about (B) & (C), I would say that I am not sure. You see, it's common in English to name an animal in the singular and mean the entire species, which implies a plural. I would say that this a shade of gray---not 100% right, but not wrong enough to be the sole justification for eliminating an answer.

I think it's important to understand how bad the "with approximately" structure is in (B) & (D). That's the real problem with those two.

The phrase from (D), "wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000," is not bad. The corresponding phrase in (E) is more elegant, but again, this slight difference would not provide the sole justification for eliminating (D).

My friend, I am going to recommend this blog article to you:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4670
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2016, 10:14
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
AK125 wrote:
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

How I tried to solve this (please correct if I am wrong):

A. the wolf has declined to 200,000 --> not the wolf, but the wolf population has declined to 200,000 we are not addressing a specific wolf. Also the modifier "once numbering in the millions worldwide" must logically relate to wolf
B. Similar to A. I think the phrase wolf population would be correct here
C. Similar to A and D.
D. wolves seem correct because it addresses all wolfs. But to an estimate of 200,000 sounds awkward like if the wolves have declined to an estimate
E. Seems correct

Dear AK125,

I'm happy to respond. Unfortunately, my friend, there are some problems with your logic.

In English, it's 100% fine to use the singular name of an animal (with the definite article) to refer to the whole species: the panther, the eagle, the blue whale. In these cases, it's understood that we are not talking about an individual panther, an individual eagle, etc. Instead, we are speaking of the whole species, all the animals that fall under that biological heading. Thus, it is 100% idiomatically correct to say "it is estimated that the wolf has declined" meaning that the numbers of the entire wolf population have declined. Now, when we combine this with the numerical information and the plural pronoun in the latter part of the sentence, this is a bit unusual---a grammatical gray zone. Nevertheless, the singular use of the animal's name can represent the species as a whole.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1202
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Dec 2016, 08:09
[quote="AbdurRakib"]Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000

"with aproximately..." work grammatically as absolute phrase which modify preceding clause. but this modification is not logic. there is no relation between "has declined" and "with approximately" .

grammatically, "some 11000..." work as adjective modifying " an estimate..." this modification is logic.

so, "some... " is correct. and "with approximately..." is wrong.

hard point
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2009
Posts: 27
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Feb 2017, 13:58
First split: Once number in the millions worldwide => should modify wolf/wolves => A out
Second split: non underlined portion contains them=> B, C out
Third split: decline to an estimated vs decline to an estimate of=> D has meaning error. Does not make sense to say decline at an estimate of 200000. Decline happens at a rate or decline results in a particular value, so E wins. Alternatively this alone can be used to arrive at E. All other options convey a different meaning:

B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately => means it is estimated(may be already) that they have declined to a fix number, doesnt make sense
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some=> same problem as D as mentioned above

_________________

If the post helps, kudos please.

Manager
Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 147
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2017, 21:53
mh

don't get this one

I mean we can immediately eliminate A, B, and C

Wolf......... 11,000 of them

that should be clear!

For D) declined to an estimate of 200,000 is awkward

but for E) ....some 11,000 of them ??? this also sounds awkward to me
_________________

I hate long and complicated explanations!

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2015
Posts: 350
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.56
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 May 2017, 05:47
Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.

A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some

B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately

C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some

D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately
--> with approximately is wordy. How can wolves have declined to an estimate ???!!!

E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some

--> correct.
_________________

Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one - Bruce Lee

Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2016
Posts: 82
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V36
GPA: 3.01
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2017, 00:23
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The first point to notice in this question should be ---- "Once numbering in the millions worldwide" should touch the noun that it intendeds to modify and that noun must be plural --- this rules out all options but D and E. "Estimate of " in D is acting as a verb which is not needed , so the answer is E
Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 258
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2017, 03:07
E is Correct. Wolves is a proper subject for numbering and agrees with the later them. The decline is correctly said to be to a number, an estimated 200,000.
_________________

Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2497
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2017, 14:40
daviddaviddavid wrote:
mh

don't get this one

I mean we can immediately eliminate A, B, and C

Wolf......... 11,000 of them

that should be clear!

For D) declined to an estimate of 200,000 is awkward

but for E) ....some 11,000 of them ??? this also sounds awkward to me

Hello daviddaviddavid,

The structure some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska is a Noun + Noun Modifier in which some 11,000 of them = Noun and to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska = Noun Modifier.

The Noun + Noun Modifiers are very versatile in nature. They can refer to any noun in the preceding clause or the entire preceding clause. The modification depends on the context of the sentence.

In the correct answer choice of this official sentence, the Noun + Noun Modifier some 11,000 of them to be found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska modifies the noun wolves. Some 11,000 wolves are now found in the lower 48 United States and Alaska.

This structure is absolutely correct. Noun + Noun Modifiers are used pretty frequently in official sentences. For more details, explanation, and official examples, please our very famous article named Noun + Noun Modifiers - The most versatile modifier in the following link:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/noun-noun-modifiers-the-most-versatile-modifier-137292.html

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2497
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2017, 14:46
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
sriamlan wrote:
The first point to notice in this question should be ---- "Once numbering in the millions worldwide" should touch the noun that it intendeds to modify and that noun must be plural --- this rules out all options but D and E. "Estimate of " in D is acting as a verb which is not needed , so the answer is E

Hello sriamlan,

I am afraid to say that your reason to reject Choice D is not correct.

Choice D uses the phrase to an estimate of. This phrase is certainly not a verb. In fact, an estimate has been used as a noun in this choice.

Yes, usage of an estimate is incorrect because per choice D, wolves have declined to an estimate. This certainly makes no sense.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Director
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 504
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2017, 11:19
A. it is estimated that the wolf has declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, some=> wolf agreement error
B. the wolf is estimated to have declined to 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately=> agreement
C. the wolf has declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, some=> agreement
D. wolves have declined to an estimate of 200,000 in 57 countries, with approximately=> estimate to be not idiomatic
E. wolves have declined to an estimated 200,000 in 57 countries, some=> estimated to be idiomatic

E is correct choice..
_________________

Give Kudos for correct answer and/or if you like the solution.

Re: Once numbering in the millions worldwide, it is estimated that the   [#permalink] 24 Sep 2017, 11:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by