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

 It is currently 21 Aug 2018, 23:03

### 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

# San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele

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

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: Keep fighting!
Affiliations: IIT Madras
Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 210
WE 1: 2+ years - Programming
WE 2: 3+ years - Product developement,
WE 3: 2+ years - Program management
San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 06:18
8
26
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

31% (01:03) correct 69% (01:03) wrong based on 1016 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angeles a world city, yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality .

A. yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality
B. yet within twenty years a powerful municipal made this boast a reality
C. yet a powerful municipal within twenty years will make this boast a reality
D. yet this boast had become a reality within twenty years because of a powerful will municipally
E. yet within twenty years a municipal will had made this boast a powerful reality
##### Most Helpful Expert Reply
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 641
Location: Cambridge, MA
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 13:17
9
3
My understanding of this unusual grammatical construction is that we can read 'within twenty years' as 'before twenty years passed'. Thus, focusing only on the second clause after the comma, the earliest event is the boast becoming reality. Since the boast becomes reality before that time finishes passing, the perfect tense is appropriate (though not mandatory).

Hope this helps!
_________________

Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT

Prepare with Kaplan and save \$150 on a course!

Kaplan Reviews

##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
Posts: 108
Concentration: General Management, Technology
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 670 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 14:13
1
KapTeacherEli wrote:
My understanding of this unusual grammatical construction is that we can read 'within twenty years' as 'before twenty years passed'. Thus, focusing only on the second clause after the comma, the earliest event is the boast becoming reality. Since the boast becomes reality before that time finishes passing, the perfect tense is appropriate (though not mandatory).

Hope this helps!

This sounds odd. Even if anyone could infer that 'within twenty years' is 'before twenty years passed' it is still (as you mentioned) unnecessary. And as far as I remember perfect is only used when doing otherwise distort meaning or causes and ambiguity regarding the occurrence of events. Both do not happen here, the sentence is perfectly clear when using the simple tense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
_________________

Consider Kudos if my post helped you. Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
My TOEFL Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-toefl-experience-99884.html
My GMAT Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-730-10-luck-20-skill-15-concentrated-power-of-will-104473.html

Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 641
Location: Cambridge, MA
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 14:20
rafi wrote:
KapTeacherEli wrote:
My understanding of this unusual grammatical construction is that we can read 'within twenty years' as 'before twenty years passed'. Thus, focusing only on the second clause after the comma, the earliest event is the boast becoming reality. Since the boast becomes reality before that time finishes passing, the perfect tense is appropriate (though not mandatory).

Hope this helps!

This sounds odd. Even if anyone could infer that 'within twenty years' is 'before twenty years passed' it is still (as you mentioned) unnecessary. And as far as I remember perfect is only used when doing otherwise distort meaning or causes and ambiguity regarding the occurrence of events. Both do not happen here, the sentence is perfectly clear when using the simple tense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Hi rafi,

You've got the right idea, but it's too narrow. The perfect tense is only required in those circumstances, but it can still be correctly used if the meaning is clear from other context.

See http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html
Quote:
If the Past Perfect action did occur at a specific time, the Simple Past can be used instead of the Past Perfect when "before" or "after" is used in the sentence. The words "before" and "after" actually tell you what happens first, so the Past Perfect is optional. For this reason, both sentences below are correct.

Examples:

She had visited her Japanese relatives once in 1993 before she moved in with them in 1996.
She visited her Japanese relatives once in 1993 before she moved in with them in 1996.

_________________

Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT

Prepare with Kaplan and save \$150 on a course!

Kaplan Reviews

Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
Posts: 108
Concentration: General Management, Technology
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 670 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 14:27
KapTeacherEli wrote:
Hi rafi,

You've got the right idea, but it's too narrow. The perfect tense is only required in those circumstances, but it can still be correctly used if the meaning is clear from other context.

See http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html
Quote:
If the Past Perfect action did occur at a specific time, the Simple Past can be used instead of the Past Perfect when "before" or "after" is used in the sentence. The words "before" and "after" actually tell you what happens first, so the Past Perfect is optional. For this reason, both sentences below are correct.

Examples:

She had visited her Japanese relatives once in 1993 before she moved in with them in 1996.
She visited her Japanese relatives once in 1993 before she moved in with them in 1996.

OK, so according to that there are two correct answers in the answer choices in this question.
When I see two correct answers like these two and I remember that the GMAT prefers simplicity I will choose answer choice B and not A. So why is A the OA?
_________________

Consider Kudos if my post helped you. Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
My TOEFL Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-toefl-experience-99884.html
My GMAT Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-730-10-luck-20-skill-15-concentrated-power-of-will-104473.html

Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 641
Location: Cambridge, MA
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 14:55
2
3
rafi wrote:
OK, so according to that there are two correct answers in the answer choices in this question.
When I see two correct answers like these two and I remember that the GMAT prefers simplicity I will choose answer choice B and not A. So why is A the OA?
Excellent question, rafi. The answer is that I'm not reading carefully enough! The exception that I cited applies to sentences with specified times, which this sentence lacks. Good catch, and thanks for pointing it out.

That being said, the past perfect tense is used to stress that one event happens before another--again, in this case, before the 20 years passes. The 'had been' past perfect is not limited exclusively to cases where it's omission would make the sentence ambiguous. For that reason, the word 'within' in the past will take the past perfect tense. Here's a couple of examples lifted from periodicals:
Quote:
He won the lottery and moved to California. Within five years, he had filed for bankruptcy.

Within five years he had another congregation at work not far from his home.
[/quote]If you're not convinced that it's grammatically necessary, then chalk it up to idiomatic language--but the 'had' tense is required here.
_________________

Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT

Prepare with Kaplan and save \$150 on a course!

Kaplan Reviews

Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
Posts: 108
Concentration: General Management, Technology
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 670 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2010, 15:16
1
KapTeacherEli wrote:
Excellent question, rafi. The answer is that I'm not reading carefully enough! The exception that I cited applies to sentences with specified times, which this sentence lacks. Good catch, and thanks for pointing it out.

That being said, the past perfect tense is used to stress that one event happens before another--again, in this case, before the 20 years passes. The 'had been' past perfect is not limited exclusively to cases where it's omission would make the sentence ambiguous. For that reason, the word 'within' in the past will take the past perfect tense. Here's a couple of examples lifted from periodicals:
Quote:
He won the lottery and moved to California. Within five years, he had filed for bankruptcy.

Within five years he had another congregation at work not far from his home.
If you're not convinced that it's grammatically necessary, then chalk it up to idiomatic language--but the 'had' tense is required here.

Thanks, I now got it. It is the idiomatic language that confused me to thinking that the 'within twenty years' does not represent an event for which it is necessary to define a past perfect when talking about another event.
_________________

Consider Kudos if my post helped you. Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
My TOEFL Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-toefl-experience-99884.html
My GMAT Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-730-10-luck-20-skill-15-concentrated-power-of-will-104473.html

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 277
Schools: Chicago Booth Class of 2013
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2010, 10:54
Just two questions.

1). I have found that another Kaplan instructor explained the issue quite differently: http://www.beatthegmat.com/past-perfect-t55356.html
Looks like she is inversing the sequence of two events. Am I right thinking that she is not exactly right?

2). I have read in some reliable resourse that if two events occured VERY long time ago, say 1 000 000 years ago, we have to use did and did rather than did and had done. So, If we were given THE SAME constructed ans-choises but there were a question speaking about events occured in prehistoric times, would we still have to chose (A)? Or (B) would be preferable because of the antiquity?

Thanks.
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 641
Location: Cambridge, MA
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2010, 11:54
Financier wrote:
Just two questions.

1). I have found that another Kaplan instructor explained the issue quite differently: http://www.beatthegmat.com/past-perfect-t55356.html
Looks like she is inversing the sequence of two events. Am I right thinking that she is not exactly right?

2). I have read in some reliable resourse that if two events occured VERY long time ago, say 1 000 000 years ago, we have to use did and did rather than did and had done. So, If we were given THE SAME constructed ans-choises but there were a question speaking about events occured in prehistoric times, would we still have to chose (A)? Or (B) would be preferable because of the antiquity?

Thanks.
Hi Financier,

That wasn't another instructor--that was me

And I'm pretty sure I said the same thing both times--we are considering the second clause, in which 'becoming reality' is an event in the past that happens before 'twenty years', and is therefore correct in the past perfect. If I mis-typed in either explanation and introduced any confusion, I apologize, but it seems to me that I was consistent!
_________________

Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT

Prepare with Kaplan and save \$150 on a course!

Kaplan Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 277
Schools: Chicago Booth Class of 2013
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2010, 12:00
KapTeacherEli wrote:
Financier wrote:
Just two questions.

1). I have found that another Kaplan instructor explained the issue quite differently: http://www.beatthegmat.com/past-perfect-t55356.html
Looks like she is inversing the sequence of two events. Am I right thinking that she is not exactly right?

2). I have read in some reliable resourse that if two events occured VERY long time ago, say 1 000 000 years ago, we have to use did and did rather than did and had done. So, If we were given THE SAME constructed ans-choises but there were a question speaking about events occured in prehistoric times, would we still have to chose (A)? Or (B) would be preferable because of the antiquity?

Thanks.
Hi Financier,

That wasn't another instructor--that was me

And I'm pretty sure I said the same thing both times--we are considering the second clause, in which 'becoming reality' is an event in the past that happens before 'twenty years', and is therefore correct in the past perfect. If I mis-typed in either explanation and introduced any confusion, I apologize, but it seems to me that I was consistent!

I alredy figured out my mistake and started to correct my post, but you are faster Could you answer my second question about antiquity?
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 641
Location: Cambridge, MA
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2010, 12:03
1
Financier wrote:
I alredy figured out my mistake and started to correct my post, but you are faster Could you answer my second question about antiquity?
Sure thing!

I've never heard of such a rule, nor seen it on the GMAT, which means you probably don't need to worry about it. However, English is a fantastically complex language, so it's entirely possible that you're correct; I'd love to see the source of that rule if you can track it down.

Hope that helps!
_________________

Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT

Prepare with Kaplan and save \$150 on a course!

Kaplan Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 293
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2016, 18:31
hemanthp wrote:
San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angeles a world city, yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality .

yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality
yet within twenty years a powerful municipal made this boast a reality
yet a powerful municipal within twenty years will make this boast a reality
yet this boast had become a reality within twenty years because of a powerful will municipally
yet within twenty years a municipal will had made this boast a powerful reality
+1 Kudos if you like the question and if you want the OE . this is from Kaplan and the OA is indeed correct!

1. Is my understanding right?

Time sequence: Moked---> had made the boast-----> 20 years.

Is that so, why mocked is not "had mocked" ?

2. Whenever we see Within 20 years/ year 0f 1920/ 5 days (some specific time), should we think of a sequence here? Is within carries the same(almost same) meaning as "BY"? ( By 1920 ... sub + past perfect.)
_________________

We Shall Overcome... One day...

Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3185
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Oct 2016, 09:23
nahid78 wrote:
hemanthp wrote:
San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angeles a world city, yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality .

yet within twenty years a powerful municipal had made this boast a reality
yet within twenty years a powerful municipal made this boast a reality
yet a powerful municipal within twenty years will make this boast a reality
yet this boast had become a reality within twenty years because of a powerful will municipally
yet within twenty years a municipal will had made this boast a powerful reality
+1 Kudos if you like the question and if you want the OE . this is from Kaplan and the OA is indeed correct!

1. Is my understanding right?

Time sequence: Moked---> had made the boast-----> 20 years.

Is that so, why mocked is not "had mocked" ?

2. Whenever we see Within 20 years/ year 0f 1920/ 5 days (some specific time), should we think of a sequence here? Is within carries the same(almost same) meaning as "BY"? ( By 1920 ... sub + past perfect.)

This is one tricky concept in tense chapter - take a look at the comments in this thread:
v12-227178.html#p1747770
Manager
Status: Started with mock tests,Kaplan and manhattan score's below
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 78
Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q44 V33
GMAT 2: 680 Q47 V37
GPA: 3.2
Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2018, 22:30

Official Explanation:

Read the Original Sentence Carefully, Looking for Errors:

While the original sentence is awkwardly worded, it is correct. Let's check the answer choices just to be safe.

Scan and Group the Answer Choices:

Choices (B), (C), and (E) all modify the verb structure. Choice (D) rewords the underlined phrase.

Eliminate Choices Until Only One Remains:

Choice (B) incorrectly changes to the simple past tense, "made."

Choices (C) and (E) needlessly break up the subject, thereby changing the meaning of the sentence.

Choice (D) distorts that meaning by making an adverb, "municipally," out of "municipal."

Answer Choice (A) correctly uses the past perfect "had made" as required because there are two past actions, one ending before the other. We use the past perfect for the action that happened first – making the boast a reality.
_________________

Thanks,
Ankit
Target Score:730+

If the post was useful,please send the kudos

Re: San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele &nbs [#permalink] 28 Jul 2018, 22:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# San Franciscans of the 1890s mocked the claim that declared Los Angele

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

# 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®.