It is currently 24 Jan 2018, 03:37

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

Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were

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

Hide Tags

2 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 1270
Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 01:05
2
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

38% (02:01) correct 62% (01:49) wrong based on 341 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were peopled more than 15,000 years ago by a group forced to traverse thousands of miles of ice fields have themselves had to overcome obstacles in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to account for the presence of artifacts in southern Chile that indicate that the New World was inhabited over 15,000 years ago.

A) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
B) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have to
C) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have themselves to
D) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those that argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
E) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later, they have to
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Simple way to always control time during the quant part.
How to solve main idea questions without full understanding of RC.
660 (Q48, V33) - unpleasant surprise
740 (Q50, V40, IR3) - anti-debrief ;)

Retired Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4324
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 03:27
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This question hinges on one major point and one fine point.

1. Major point --- Whether we use ‘have to’ or ‘have had to' as the verb for those who oppose the thesis?
2. fine point ---Which is the appropriate transitional conjunction we have to use, yet or whereas?]

First thing is that ‘have to’ is inappropriate unless it is a daily chore or a universal point.

For a debate that started sometime ago and that which still continues, ‘have had to’ is the apt verb; so, B C and E can be dumped instantly.

Between A and D, I would reckon there is no forthright contrast implied in the passage by the author. He seems to express that while this is A’s point, this is B’s point. This is more indicative. So, A using ‘yet’ is a shade more preferable to choice D using ‘whereas’. But this is my personal proposition; I am keen to know the official version;
Magoosh’s questions in the forum seem to be getting finer and finer
_________________

Can you solve at least some SC questions without delving into the initial statement?

Narendran 98845 44509


Last edited by daagh on 10 Aug 2015, 04:37, edited 1 time in total.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 01 Nov 2013
Posts: 338
GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)
Reviews Badge
Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 03:51
daagh wrote:
This question hinges on one major point and one fine point.

1. Major point --- Whether we use ‘have to’ or ‘have had’ to as the verb for those who oppose the thesis?
2. fine point ---Which is the appropriate transitional conjunction we have to use, yet or whereas?]

First thing is that ‘have to’ is inappropriate unless it is a daily chore or a universal point.

For a debate that started sometime ago and that which still continues, ‘have had to’ is the apt verb; so, B C and E can be dumped instantly.

Between A and D, I would reckon there is no forthright contrast implied in the passage by the author. He seems to express that while this is A’s point, this is B’s point. This is more indicative. So, A using ‘yet’ is a shade more preferable to choice D using ‘whereas’. But this is my personal proposition; I am keen to know the official version;
Magoosh’s questions in the forum seem to be getting finer and finer



Appreciate your analysis but I think the use of THAT after those is incorrect in D ;So A is anytime better.
_________________

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.

I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Apr 2015
Posts: 3
Concentration: General Management
Re: Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 04:06
Harley1980 wrote:
Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were peopled more than 15,000 years ago by a group forced to traverse thousands of miles of ice fields have themselves had to overcome obstacles in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to account for the presence of artifacts in southern Chile that indicate that the New World was inhabited over 15,000 years ago.

A) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
B) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have to
C) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have themselves to
D) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those that argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
E) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later, they have to


Can someone please explain why is C wrong?

1) Eliminated B and E as it should be "in trying to account"

2) Eliminated D as there should be parallelism in argue THAT..... and THAT the first peopling

3) Between A and C why is A better?

Appreciate an explanation. Thanks!
5 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 1270
Location: Ukraine
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 05:32
5
This post received
KUDOS
Harley1980 wrote:
Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were peopled more than 15,000 years ago by a group forced to traverse thousands of miles of ice fields have themselves had to overcome obstacles in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to account for the presence of artifacts in southern Chile that indicate that the New World was inhabited over 15,000 years ago.

A) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
B) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those who argue such a trek was indeed impossible and thus the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have to
C) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have themselves to
D) in trying to account for such an improbable journey, whereas those that argue that such a trek was indeed impossible and the first peopling of the Americas happened much later have had to
E) by trying to account for such an improbable journey, yet those arguing that such a trek was indeed impossible and thus that the first peopling of the Americas happened much later, they have to


OE from Magoosh

This question has many words, but eliminating the wrong answers shouldn’t be as difficult as in other questions. First off, we have the 3:2 split of “by trying to account” and “in trying to account”.

“By trying” implies that the proponents started to overcome the obstacles by trying to account for such an improbable journey. But that’s the very obstacle these scholar face: trying to account for this improbable journey. Eliminate (B) and (E).

Next, (C) creates a funky meaning by saying “have themselves to account for”. They are not accounting for themselves in any respect. Rather, they themselves have had “to account for the presence of artifacts.”

(D) uses the “those that”. It should be those who”, since we are talking about people.

Answer is A
_________________

Simple way to always control time during the quant part.
How to solve main idea questions without full understanding of RC.
660 (Q48, V33) - unpleasant surprise
740 (Q50, V40, IR3) - anti-debrief ;)

Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10272
Premium Member
Re: Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2017, 10:36
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
SVP
SVP
avatar
G
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1864
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Dec 2017, 14:36
this question is indeed interesting. The first time I read the original question, it took me around 45 second to comprehend and map out the position of main subjects and main verbs.

Next, I notice the tense "have had", so only A and D are left; other option choices do not parallel with the tense.
D changes the meaning b/c of "whereas" vs "yet", and "and" vs "and thus"
"and" vs "and thus" -> the original sentence has causal relaitonship
"whereas" indicates a contrast while "yet" just introduces another clause.
Re: Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were   [#permalink] 29 Dec 2017, 14:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Proponents of the school of thought positing that the Americas were

  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®.