Double Standards of GMAT, Mindblowing!

dato10kokli
You should not rely too much on the answer explanations provided in the OG. Though the answers in the OG are correct, the explanations are provided not by GMAC itself but by some outsourced companies. That's why we see multiple posts on different forums e.g. Gmatclub, Manhattan Prep, etc for any GMAT question. You should always try to look for logical explanations of the problems rather than the ones that say "rhetoric" or " sounds good".

For the below correct choices.

With the patience of its customers and with its network and the patience of its customers strained to the breaking point, the on-line service company announced a series of new initiatives to try to relieve the congestion that has led to at least four class-action lawsuits and thousands of complaints from frustrated customers.

This is correct because an initiative is always "intentional" and hence, infinitive form is correct.

Although the rise in the Producer Price Index was greater than expected, most analysts agreed that the index was unlikely to continue going up and that inflation remained essentially under control.

Ask yourself, whose "intention" is to make the index go up? - No definite answer you have.
At this moment, you know that infinitive form (to go up) is not mandatory here. You must look other reasons to select or reject the choice.

GMAT verbal does not rely on a set of formulae or rules to be memorised.

You should know that GMAC itself does not provide the OG explanations; the organization is only responsible for designing the questions. That being said, the problem in the "Although.." question has got nothing to do with the usage of "continue to go up"; the main problem is the change in meaning caused by the prepositional modifier "with inflation to remain" that modifies, completely or partially, the verb phrase was unlikely to continue to go up. In option A of this question, the intended meaning is that analysts agreed on 2 things.

Cheers!

Hi dato10kokli,

You’ve found an explanation that appears to contradict something you read in another explanation. This is not really something that is completely unexpected in verbal, and if there is a problem, it is with the English language, not with the explanations. This is to say that both questions (and their explanations) are absolutely fine. Here is a (somewhat) similar example:

1. The Indian government announced a nationwide lockdown to try to stop the spread of the disease.
2. The Indian government announced a nationwide lockdown to try stopping the spread of the disease.

(1) is actually much better than (2). This is a valid decision point. All that the explanation did was point that fact out. In a different situation, we may end up going the other way:

3. She will continue taking the GMAT until she gets the score she wants.
4. She will continue to take the GMAT until she gets the score she wants.

(3) is slightly better than (4). This is very unlikely to be the only decision point in a GMAT question.

At the end of the day, this does come down to “sound”, and you may wish to ask more experts to weigh in on this.

Hi dato10kokli, GMAT is not really contradicting itself. As AjiteshArun rightly pointed out, the issue is with English .

When two verbs (or verb forms) appear together, the first verb determines whether the second verb will be in the gerund form (-ing form of the verb) or in the infinitive form (to + the basic form of the verb).

In the examples you've mentioned, the two verbs (or verb forms) are: try/relieve and continue/go.

The only fool-proof way is to memorize which verbs are followed by gerunds and which are followed by infinitives. So, in some ways, you can consider this as idiomatic usage.

However, the silver lining is that most verbs are followed by infinitives. On the other hand, few verbs/verb forms such as appreciate, enjoy, postpone, regret etc. are generally followed by gerunds.

Another similar official example:

Warning that computers in the United States are not secure, the National Academy of Sciences has urged the nation to revamp computer security procedures, institute new emergency response teams, creating a special nongovernment organization to take charge of computer security planning.

(D) and create a special nongovernment organization for taking

(E) and create a special nongovernment organization to take

Notice that for taking and to take is the only differentiator in options D and E. Option E (to take) is the right answer.

Needless to say, this difference (gerund vs infinitive) should be your last split, when choosing an answer choice.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses this issue of "two verbs/verb-forms", its application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.