It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 15:44

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

Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that

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

Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 358

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 0

Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 05:46
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

81% (00:43) correct 19% (01:00) wrong based on 127 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

633. Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that employers should retain all older workers indefinitely or show just cause for dismissal.

(A) that employers should retain all older workers
(B) that all older workers be retained by employers
(C) the retaining by employers of all older workers
(D) employers’ retention of all older workers
(E) employers to retain all older workers

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 205

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 06:11
vksunder wrote:
633. Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that employers should retain all older workers indefinitely or show just cause for dismissal.

(A) that employers should retain all older workers
(B) that all older workers be retained by employers
(C) the retaining by employers of all older workers
(D) employers’ retention of all older workers
(E) employers to retain all older workers


e.

a sounds wrong..unable to pin point why.
b passive voice.
c grammar is wrong. retaining is form of verb. retention might have made more sense
d retention is noun form. the alternative "or show" is verb. mismatch

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 271

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 1

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 06:35
Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that employers should retain all older workers indefinitely or show just cause for dismissal.

(A) that employers should retain all older workers
(B) that all older workers be retained by employers
(C) the retaining by employers of all older workers
(D) employers’ retention of all older workers
(E) employers to retain all older workers

E is the best answer

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 1

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1534

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 06:43
the correct form would be "require + subject + infinitive".

A is wrong because of "should".

E is the answer.

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 358

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 0

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 09:40
OA = E. Could you please explain as to why B is incorrect?

I picked B due to subjuntive rule. However, the subjunctive strucutre does not seem to be valid in this particular situation. Is it due to the fact that the verbs 'to retain' and 'show' requires parallelism?

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2008, 09:53
E is correct for 2 main reasons:

"require to" should be followed by subjunctive mood.
"to retain" and "(to) show" should be parallel.

Rest all of them seem to be missing these elements.
_________________

rainmaker

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2010
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 1

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jun 2010, 22:25
I still have doubt why E is correct and not B. As per the subjunctive definition it should have that +infinitive form of verb without to .

This clearly is satisfied by choice B , any comments ??

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 1

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
Posts: 409

Kudos [?]: 114 [1], given: 26

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2010, 00:52
1
This post received
KUDOS
boros2203 wrote:
I still have doubt why E is correct and not B. As per the subjunctive definition it should have that +infinitive form of verb without to .

This clearly is satisfied by choice B , any comments ??



the reason B is wrong is because the tense is shifted to passive (i.e. be retained BY employers) and will not match the second part ([to] show just cause for dismissal), which is an active phrase.
_________________

kudos if you like me (or my post) :P

Kudos [?]: 114 [1], given: 26

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 11

Re: SC: Senator Lasker [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2010, 09:28
vksunder wrote:
633. Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that employers should retain all older workers indefinitely or show just cause for dismissal.

(A) that employers should retain all older workers
(B) that all older workers be retained by employers
(C) the retaining by employers of all older workers
(D) employers’ retention of all older workers
(E) employers to retain all older workers


E it is.
requiring employees to retain or (to) show.
Passive voice in choice B.

Would be really good if you can underline the portion that has to be corrected.

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 11

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10119

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jan 2015, 04:34
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.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 167

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 141

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Copenhagen, ESMT"19
GPA: 3.75
WE: Consulting (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Aug 2017, 11:21
I am not able to reject B here , Is is rejected just for being a passing voice . what happened to subjunctive rule.
Thanks mod for your time and help.

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 141

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 31 Dec 2015
Posts: 58

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 262

Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q44 V38
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V39
GPA: 3.9
Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Aug 2017, 20:57
1. The incorrect part is not underlined.
2. There is no OA posted.

Can somebody please post the OA?

Confused between B and E.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 262

VP
VP
User avatar
G
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1070

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 533

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2017, 04:56
vksunder wrote:
633. Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that employers should retain all older workers indefinitely or show just cause for dismissal.

(A) that employers should retain all older workers
(B) that all older workers be retained by employers
(C) the retaining by employers of all older workers
(D) employers’ retention of all older workers
(E) employers to retain all older workers


The answer is E

In GMAT should is used for moral obligation
Here Laws are mandatory so we have to use infinitive of purpose .
The non underlined part of the sentence is in direct voice so we have to maintain the structure
So E is the best answer
_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 533

Director
Director
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Mar 2016
Posts: 530

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 97

Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2017, 22:38
E is the best fit,,

in option B, the first part is passive and second part is active..
hence not parallel..

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 97

Expert Post
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
B
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 1109

Kudos [?]: 1174 [0], given: 29

Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Aug 2017, 03:20
arvind910619, we don't have to worry about moral obligation here. All the wrong answers are wrong for clear grammatical reasons! Also, we don't need to restrict "should" to moral cases. Consider these: "Anyone who lives in the area should know where the stadium is." "One should expect some side effects during the first week of treatment." "A good theory should create testable predictions."

Anyway . . .

Answer A is wrong because we can't mix "require" with "should." We can't require that someone should do something. We can only require that they actually do it!

B fixed the problem above, correctly applying the command subjunctive ("require that X be done"). However, it creates a huge meaning problem. We're requiring that older workers "be retained . . . or show just cause." It's not the workers who have to show just cause. Yes, there's a shift here from passive to active, but that can be okay if the meaning makes sense. ("He will either leave the room voluntarily or be escorted out by guards.") However, since the meaning is off (the employees must be retained unless the employers can show just cause), this is out. A simple way to sum this up is that we've put our verb with the wrong subject.

C is not parallel at all. It matches a noun with a verb: "requires the retaining . . . or show just cause." This is no good, even if we accept the odd "requires the retaining" at the beginning.

D has the same problem: it tries to make "the retention" parallel to "show."

E finally has good structure. The legislation requires employers to "retain . . . or show."
_________________


Dmitry Farber | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | New York


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile |
Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 1174 [0], given: 29

Re: Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that   [#permalink] 30 Aug 2017, 03:20
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Senator Lasker has proposed legislation requiring that

  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®.