VeritasPrepRon wrote:
In actuality, the fall of the threat level has implications on the production, but not on the threat of new disease. I'd prefer answer E if it had "should" instead of "will", because I don't see how the threat level guarantees production level (there should seemingly be other factors such as weather, demand, subsidies, etc), but the logic structure trumps this wording as the more egregious error.
Hi Ron,
Sorry, don't really agree with what you are saying here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "should" in GMAT used only for advice/recommendation ?
If the original sentence is suggesting "should", I acknowledge that by choosing "will" in E, we are changing the original meaning but isn't it natural to check whether that original choice made sense or not ? To me, that does not ..
The original one literally conveys: "The fall in the threat of a known disease indicates Farmers
should maintain high production in the next quarter".
1) Fall cannot recommend anything to begin with.
2) Even if it does, contrast with "but" in the other half of sentence does not align with this recommendation.
It would have been logical, had it been something like this in the non-underlined part:
"but the maintenance of high level of production will add to the surplus and will be a net loss to the farmers".Lastly, I agree to what you said about will (other factors that can be a reason), so to me "will be able to/can" would have made more sense in place of stronger and lonely "will".
That's just my two cents.