GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 21 Aug 2018, 10:49

### 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

# QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 5120
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 10:53
8
37
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

64% (01:49) correct 36% (01:46) wrong based on 1242 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Verbal Question of The Day: Day 53: Sentence Correction

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.

Every question of the day will be followed by an expert reply by GMATNinja in 12-15 hours. Stay tuned! Post your answers and explanations to earn kudos.

_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1909
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 10:55
11
7
Quote:
A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

"They" really doesn't work very well here. Sure, we intuitively understand that "they" refers back to "companies"... except that "companies" is possessive in this sentence, and a non-possessive pronoun ("they") can't refer back to a possessive noun on the GMAT. At the very least, I've never seen a correct answer that does so -- and this could definitely be clearer. Eliminate (A).

Quote:
B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002.

"That" is used as a singular pronoun here, so we need to look for a singular noun that it could refer back to. I don't see a whole lot of options: "total", I guess? But that really doesn't make much sense. (For more on the GMAT's many uses of "that", click here.)

Plus, we still have the same pronoun issue as in (A). Eliminate (B).

Quote:
C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.

"They" works a little bit better, but "that of" still doesn't make any sense. (C) is out.

Quote:
D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

This looks fine! We're legitimately comparing the number of subsidiaries now, and the pronoun issues have been cleaned up. Keep (D).

Quote:
E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.

The comparison at the end is incredibly wordy, and that's not necessarily the end of the world, but (D) is clearly better. Plus, we're back to the same pronoun issue as in (A) and (B). So (E) is gone, and (D) is the correct answer.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

##### General Discussion
BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1104
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 11:30
1
In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002. -Unidiomatic. Growth of the assets is correct idiom.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002. -Double is not used when there is a comparision. We need twice.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002. - Twice that is wrong in this context.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002. -CORRECT.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002. -The adverb "rapidly" and adjective "rapid" could have been avoided. They are redundant.

Please correct me if I am wrong anywhere.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos if it helps!
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Long And A Fruitful Journey - V21 to V41; If I can, So Can You!!

Preparing for RC my way

My study resources:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC
7. GMAT Prep Challenge RC

VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1218
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 11:45
Imo E

We are comparing number so E is better .
D compares number to subsidiary
_________________

Director
Joined: 18 Aug 2016
Posts: 631
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 11:46
souvik101990 wrote:

Verbal Question of The Day: Day 53: Sentence Correction

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.

Every question of the day will be followed by an expert reply by GMATNinja in 12-15 hours. Stay tuned! Post your answers and explanations to earn kudos.

I will stick to A considering that the decision was not rapidly taken
_________________

We must try to achieve the best within us

Thanks
Luckisnoexcuse

Manager
Joined: 26 Jun 2013
Posts: 87
Location: India
GMAT 1: 590 Q42 V29
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 11:50
I think its D as clauses separated by a colon (:) should refer the same subject (companies...they)
_________________

Remember, if it is a GMAT question, it can be simplified elegantly.

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 415
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 11:55
1
souvik101990 wrote:

Verbal Question of The Day: Day 53: Sentence Correction

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.

Every question of the day will be followed by an expert reply by GMATNinja in 12-15 hours. Stay tuned! Post your answers and explanations to earn kudos.

This question was something.

A - 'they' has no antecedent as companies' is a possessive noun so it cannot refer to companies. Out.
B - Same as A.
C - Twice that of 2002 is incorrect. Out.
D - 'they' and 'their' refer back to ten largest companies. + 'twice as many as in 2002' correct compares the subsidiaries in 2002 Vs. the subsidiaries in 2011.
E - E suffers from the same issues as A & B.

D is the correct answer. Waiting for the OA
_________________

Put in the work, and that dream score is yours!

Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2017
Posts: 37
GMAT 1: 710 Q45 V42
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V39
GPA: 3.73
QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 18:36
2
A, B and E are all out for pronoun error. "THEY" do not have a clear antecedent as "THEY" do not refer to companies' assets but should refer to the companies themselves.

The difference in C and D is a comparison parallelism issue.

C. "they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002" - subsidiaries "in" is not parallel to "that of"....you cannot say nearly twice "subsidiaries of 2002"

D - "they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002" - Correctly compares the number of subsidiaries in 2011 to the number of subsidiaries in 2002

Manager
Joined: 02 May 2016
Posts: 82
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship
GRE 1: Q163 V154
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2017, 07:00
2
arvind910619 wrote:
Imo E

We are comparing number so E is better .
D compares number to subsidiary

Here is why E is wrong (assuming you have eliminated A, B, and C)
In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.

Identify the Subject and Verb pair: Assets is the subject. Is this sentence correct: "Fuelled by asset's rapid expansion into new lines of business"? No. Also, consider this after semicolon: "Assets had a total of 592 subsidiaries....". No!!! Companies had subsidiaries.
Hence, E is out.
Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4530
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2017, 07:16
1
Top Contributor

Quote:
I rejected B because for following reason

b) the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs that the males build and decorate with flowers and other vegetation in order to attract females

That is right next to noun twigs so it should modify twigs. Although if there was comma in between (shown as below), then I would have picked B without any doubt.

b) the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs , that the males build and decorate with flowers and other vegetation in order to attract females

Can you someone please shed some light on this matter

Original B: The bowerbirds of Australia derive their name from the fact that the males build elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs that the males build and decorate with flowers and other vegetation in order to attract females, decorating them with flowers and other vegetation in a display of courtship.

Your version: The bowerbirds of Australia derive their name from the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs, that the males build and decorate with flowers and other vegetation in order to attract females, decorating them with flowers and other vegetation in a display of courtship.

You can see the meaning goes awry with the introduction of the comma before that. When you put the comma, then the content between the two commas is rendered inessential and should not alter the intended meaning of the main sentence. If you remove the modifier, then the sentence reads:
The bowerbirds of Australia derive their name from the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs decorating them with flowers and other vegetation in a display of courtship.
Now, who is decorating whom or what? It looks as though sticks and twigs or bowers of sticks and twigs are decorating the birds (them)
We can now see how weird the meaning changes. Logically, we know that the birds cannot build sticks and twigs but only bowers. Therefore, B is quite ok

HTH
_________________

you can know a lot about something and not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Intern
Joined: 03 May 2014
Posts: 32
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2017, 07:37
Typical GMAT question with so much of obscured structure.
After reading few times, used split - "nearly twice as many as in" to narrow down to A and D. D is more concise and clear. Answer D.
Manager
Status: GMAT...one last time for good!!
Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 67
Location: India
Concentration: General Management
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V34
GPA: 3.5
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2017, 08:53
Option A,B,E can be eliminated basis the pronoun reference of 'they' to 'assets' This comparison doesnt make sense.
So the comparison is between C and D.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.
Here 'the nation's' is redundant,..In South Korea, the ten largest companies experienced.... this would have been better. Verb+ed 'fueled' modifies 'the early 2000's' which again doesnt make sense.

'that of' is wrong. 'the number in' would have been better.

Option D is the winner

In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002.
_________________

Kudos for a correct solution

Intern
Joined: 14 Jun 2017
Posts: 20
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2017, 10:48
There was supposed to be an expert reply to this but its missing
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1909
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2017, 10:23
jenks88 wrote:
There was supposed to be an expert reply to this but its missing

It's there -- right below the original post.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Intern
Joined: 13 Jun 2017
Posts: 1
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2017, 08:48
Can someone explain why "that" does not make sense in choice c? I am of the belief that "that of" = total of
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1909
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2017, 08:50
nafrank112 wrote:
Can someone explain why "that" does not make sense in choice c? I am of the belief that "that of" = total of

In theory, it would make sense for "that of" to refer back to "total", since "total" is the nearest singular noun. So here's (C) again, with "that of" replaced by "total of":

In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the total of 2002.

It's not horrible, but it certainly isn't great, either. It seems awfully weird to say "the total of 2002" in this case, partly because it sounds like the year is somehow possessing the total. More importantly: notice the phrase "total of 592 subsidiaries" earlier in the sentence. If we follow that with the phrase "total of 2002", it sounds like we might be trying to say that there are a total of 2002 subsidiaries, and that makes no sense at all.

Again, this isn't a totally heinous crime, and you could probably hold your nose and pick (C) if there weren't any better alternatives. But the phrase "total of 2002" is just shaky enough that it should at least make you hesitate a little bit.

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 209
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2017, 03:32
gmatexam439 wrote:
In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002.

A. In South Korea in the early 2000s, growth in the nation’s ten largest companies’ assets was fueled by the companies’ rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002. -Unidiomatic. Growth of the assets is correct idiom.

B. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies’ asset growth was fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly double that of 2002. -Double is not used when there is a comparision. We need twice.

C. In South Korea, the nation’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth in the early 2000s, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice that of 2002. - Twice that is wrong in this context.

D. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies experienced rapid asset growth, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice as many as in 2002. -CORRECT.

E. In the early 2000s, South Korea’s ten largest companies’ assets grew rapidly, fueled by their rapid expansion into new lines of business: they had a total of 592 subsidiaries in 2011, nearly twice the number they had in 2002. -The adverb "rapidly" and adjective "rapid" could have been avoided. They are redundant.

Please correct me if I am wrong anywhere.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos if it helps!

Hi, option D also has rapid asset growth, fuel by rapid expansion. Why is that not considered redundant like E?
Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 209
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2017, 03:33
I am still confused after reading all the explanations. Why is there no pronoun ambiguity in option D like the other options? How can one say that 'they' and 'their' refers back to the companies in option D but not in other sentences? I don't see the difference
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1909
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2017, 19:43
pra1785 wrote:
I am still confused after reading all the explanations. Why is there no pronoun ambiguity in option D like the other options? How can one say that 'they' and 'their' refers back to the companies in option D but not in other sentences? I don't see the difference

Ah, I think I see where the confusion is coming from. In (D), you could argue that there's a little bit of ambiguity, but pronoun ambiguity isn't an absolute rule on the GMAT. More on that in this YouTube webinar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhN_KU1bSKU.

The bigger issue is when a pronoun has no reasonable referent at all. In (A), (B), and (E), one problem is that "they" logically needs to refer back to "companies", but "companies" is actually possessive. And in most cases on the GMAT, non-possessive pronouns can't refer back to possessive nouns.

The other pronoun problem is the use of "that of" at the end of the sentence in (B) and (C). "That" is a singular pronoun in this case, but it has no logical referent at all. And that's a much, much bigger problem than the small ambiguity issues in (D).

For more on the uses of "that" (as a pronoun, among other things), check out this article: https://gmatclub.com/forum/experts-topi ... 43686.html

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1849
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Nov 2017, 03:42
"they" is the key word here b/c test takers can quickly find the correct answer with this hint.
Re: QOTD: In South Korea in the early 2000s &nbs [#permalink] 30 Nov 2017, 03:42

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 25 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 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®.