Last visit was: 12 Sep 2024, 00:02 It is currently 12 Sep 2024, 00:02
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2018
Posts: 87
Own Kudos [?]: 70 [0]
Given Kudos: 210
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 12 Sep 2015
Posts: 6803
Own Kudos [?]: 31275 [0]
Given Kudos: 799
Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2018
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 10
Location: India
GMAT 1: 580 Q43 V26
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5457
Own Kudos [?]: 4804 [0]
Given Kudos: 677
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
SurajSharma
Option E has 'simultaneously with' in the statement, is there a typo or is that right. Because as per understanding having 'With" in the statement doesn't make sense and on the hand it actually makes it a bit wordily. Please explain.
Hi SurajSharma,

The with is fine:
... X arose simultaneously with but independently of Y

It means that X arose ~along with (but independently of) Y.
CEO
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 2507
Own Kudos [?]: 2182 [0]
Given Kudos: 1979
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
Archit143
Hi
i have doubt with option E.
"cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but"
"The first trenches cut into........." is a clause.
I think cut is a verb for the subject "first trenches"......Now in the same sentence, another verb "have yielded" too stands fr the subject "The first trenches"
So my doubt is hwo can there be two verb fr the same subject, when there is no connector.

Consider kudos if my post helps!!!!!

Archit

"cut into a 500 acre ..." is a modifier. It modifies 'trenches' i.e. it tells you more about the trenches.
As pointed out by Vercules above, "cut into a 500 acre" can be replaced by "that were cut into a 500 acre". The meaning doesn't change but you can see clearly that "cut into..." is modifying trenches.
The verb is 'have yielded'.

Responding to a pm:
Quote:
Here I'm completely confused with the first usage of "that" in the sentence "The first trenches THAT were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar,". Isn't "THAT" a relative pronoun here, which should refer to "TRENCHES", and if it refers to trenches here, isn't this redundant to use.
"The first trenches that(trenches) were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar,"

Yes, "that" is a relative pronoun and "that were cut ...Syria" is a defining relative clause.
You can omit the relative pronoun when it acts as the object of the relative clause. You cannot omit it when it acts as the subject of the relative clause.
Here it acts as the subject "trenches were cut ..." hence you cannot omit "that".

Alternatively, option (E) uses a participle and that is correct too.
The job that Mr. X did in 1997 blah blah....
If remove 'that':
The job Mr. X did in 1997 blah blah.... (correct sentence)

The job that is done by Mr. X blah blah.....
^^ we can't remove 'that' from here.
Are you talking about these by the highlighted part?

Can you explain the highlighted part if I miss anything to comprehend?
Thanks...
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15296
Own Kudos [?]: 67986 [1]
Given Kudos: 442
Location: Pune, India
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1
Kudos
TheUltimateWinner
The job that Mr. X did in 1997 blah blah....
If remove 'that':
The job Mr. X did in 1997 blah blah.... (correct sentence)

The job that is done by Mr. X blah blah.....
^^ we can't remove 'that' from here.
Are you talking about these by the highlighted part?

Can you explain the highlighted part if I miss anything to comprehend?
Thanks...

You are correct in your understanding. Though note that we cannot remove 'that' while maintaining the clause in the second sentence but we can get rid of the clause and use a participle.

The job done by Mr. X led to the simplification of the project.
Intern
Joined: 07 Jun 2020
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
mikemcgarry
fameatop
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.
(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but
(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also
(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but
(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also
(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but

Although I accept that "evidence for" is wrongly used and "evidence that" is the right usage, some discussions said about the use of "that"
Why don't we need "that" after trenches ?
How do we know that author is talking about "first trenches" or he is talking about the "first trenches that were cut into"?
And for the second "that" used after "Middle East" is there any reason why it is wrongly used other than that it modifies "middle east" ,although it should have modified "societies"
I'm happy to help with this. This is SC#70 from the OG13.

The opening choices ------
"The first trenches that were cut ...." ----- this modifies "trenches" with a subordinate clause, a clause beginning with "that". This is perfectly correct.
"The first trenches having been cut ...." --- participle with a strange tense, not correct
"The first trenches cut ...." ---- as fameatop pointed out above, this is participial phrase, also 100% correct. For more on participial phrases, see:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/participle ... -the-gmat/

The difference between this would be like the difference between
(a) The horse that was traded for an electric guitar was now .....
(b) The horse, traded for an electric guitar, was now ....
(a) is a "that" clause construction, (b) is a participial construction, and both are correct.

You see, grammar is complex. You can just memorize a simple rule like don't drop the word "that" ----- There are two very different "that" clauses to consider.

Category #1: relative clauses
This is what appears in this sentence. Here, the word "that" acting as a relative pronoun -- others include who, whom, whoever, etc. Within the relative clause, the relative pronoun acts as a pronoun within the clause, often the subject of the clause. Let's look at (A) from the prompt ---- the relative clause is in green.
(1) The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria have yielded ...
Within that clause, the pronoun "that" is the subject of the clause, the subject of the verb "were cut."
Other examples includes
(2) The horse that was traded for an electric guitar was now ....
(3) The regions of Europe that Julius Caesar conquered were not .....
In #2, the word "that" is also the subject of the clause, now the subject of the verb "was traded." In #3, the word "that" is the direct object of the verb "conquered."

Nobody drops the "that" from a relative clause ----- since "that" is acts as a pronoun in the clause, it always sound terribly awkward to drop a pronoun. Pick any sentence with a pronoun, and say the sentence without the pronoun --- it will sound bizarre and incomplete Nobody makes this mistake. The dropping the "that" mistake is never a concern with relative clauses.

Category #2: substantive clauses
For more on this structure, read these two posts:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/substantiv ... -the-gmat/
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-idiom ... ieve-that/
This is what we have following the word "evidence" in the SC sentence above ---- evidence that ..., know that ...., hope that ...., wish that ...., believe that ..... hypothesis that .... etc. etc. etc.
Here, the word "that" is followed by a full [noun] + [verb] clause. Examples, with substantive clause in green ----
(4) .... evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.
(5) The Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal.
(6) The senator said that he will not seek reelection.
In all three cases, what follows "that" is a full clause --- in each case, we could extract the green section, throw away the word "that", and the rest of the green part could stand on its own as a full complete sentence. Here, the word "that" is NOT acting as a pronoun --- rather, it is serving to introduce a full clause. Because the word "that" plays no essential role within the clause, it is very tempting to drop it --- in fact, people do all the time in casual conversation, and the GMAT always tests this. This is where one has to have one's antennae up, looking for this very predictable mistake.

Does all this make sense?

Mike

Hi Mike,

Can I also get some help to understand the use of "have yielded"? Because the cutting of the trenches happens first, followed by the "yield" of results. Should we be affected by such past perfect tense construction?

Thank you.
Intern
Joined: 03 Nov 2019
Posts: 27
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 87
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
I was able to eliminate options B,C and D based on the obvious errors.

When I was choosing between A and E , I used tenses to choose option E. Option E says 'arose' which is simple past tense. Simple past tense has been used for the other verbs as well.

Option A uses Past Continuous tense. So I decided it is wrong.

Is this approach correct ?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 7056
Own Kudos [?]: 65068 [5]
Given Kudos: 1835
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
4
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
PRNDL
I was able to eliminate options B,C and D based on the obvious errors.

When I was choosing between A and E , I used tenses to choose option E. Option E says 'arose' which is simple past tense. Simple past tense has been used for the other verbs as well.

Option A uses Past Continuous tense. So I decided it is wrong.

Is this approach correct ?
I think your approach here was perfectly reasonable, but I'd frame it a little differently.

First, "that were arising simultaneously" certainly seems like a clunkier phrase than "arose simultaneously," as we see in (E), so as a tie-breaker, sure, (E) seems better. But I'm not certain that the use of "that were arising simultaneously" is definitively wrong. Why couldn't societies arise as a process that unfolds over time?

However, if you take another look at (A), you'll see a couple of other issues:

Quote:
(A) The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.
First, the portion in red is confusing. You can produce evidence for the prosecution. But would you produce it for societies? You might reason that the author means that we evidence for the existence of societies, but it takes some work to arrive at that interpretation.

Moreover, the portion in blue kind of makes it sound as though the regions were arising simultaneously, rather than the societies. Again, you can double back and figure out what the modifier is actually describing the societies, but the initial confusion is less than ideal.

Last, the phrase, "The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria," is wonky too. Usually, we use "that" to differentiate between the group we're writing about and a broader group. For instance, if I write, "The white-tailed deer that urinate in Tim's garden are his least favorite," I make it clear that there are some white-tailed deer that pee in his garden, and others that don't; it's only the first group that Tim doesn't like so much.

But in (A), "that" creates the impression that there were first trenches cut into the site and other first trenches that weren't cut at the site, and we're only concerned with the first group. That doesn't make much sense. There can't be more than one group of first trenches, can there?

Would I get rid of (A) right off the bat because of these issues? Probably not. They certainly aren't concrete grammatical errors, and the meaning issues are at least debatable. But in a side-by-side comparison, would I be willing to use these them as a justification for picking another option, provided that this other option didn't have any other problems? You bet.

(E) eliminates all of these issues, so it's clearer and better.

I hope that helps!
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2021
Posts: 316
Own Kudos [?]: 148 [0]
Given Kudos: 523
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
This is a really high quality question
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2021
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
hi.
Im not a native speaker.
How is this correct? or parallel?
"arose simultaneously WITH BUT independently OF.."
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5457
Own Kudos [?]: 4804 [1]
Given Kudos: 677
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1
Kudos
valeriacastro11
hi.
Im not a native speaker.
How is this correct? or parallel?
"arose simultaneously WITH BUT independently OF.."
Hi valeriacastro11,

That of that we see at the end is important from an idiomatic point of view, but it is irrelevant as far as parallelism is concerned. The trick here is to not worry too much about what you see after the main element. Instead, focus on the initial word(s) you see after arose.

1. ... arose simultaneously with but independently of...

This is like arose (a) simultaneously... and (b) independently.
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2021
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
Thank you. But I still see the sentence as an incomplete one...
arose simultaneously with what?... is that an idiom?
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5457
Own Kudos [?]: 4804 [2]
Given Kudos: 677
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
2
Kudos
valeriacastro11
Thank you. But I still see the sentence as an incomplete one...
arose simultaneously with what?... is that an idiom?
Hi valeriacastro11,

The last part of the sentence ("the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia") is common to both.

1. ... simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states... ← This is like saying "simultaneously with {the more celebrated city-states of...} but independently of {the more celebrated city-states of...}".

We see something similar in structures like "in and around Rome", where the final element is common to both prepositions in that structure (in and around).
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Posts: 5129
Own Kudos [?]: 4699 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1
Kudos
valeriacastro11
Thank you. But I still see the sentence as an incomplete one...
arose simultaneously with what?... is that an idiom?

Hello valeriacastro11,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your query, we believe we can resolve your doubt.

Here "simultaneously with" and "independently of" modify the verb "arose" to form one verb phrase that acts upon the object "the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 7056
Own Kudos [?]: 65068 [1]
Given Kudos: 1835
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1
Kudos
valeriacastro11
hi.
Im not a native speaker.
How is this correct? or parallel?
"arose simultaneously WITH BUT independently OF.."
Here's a slightly simplified version of choice (E), with a blank in place of the parallel list:

"The first trenches cut {...} have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose __________ the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia..."

The parallelism is as follows: "... arose (1) simultaneously with but (2) independently of..." Each of the bolded items consists of an adverb (simultaneously, independently) followed by a preposition (with, of). So we have two grammatically parallel elements linked by a parallelism trigger (the conjunction "but"). So far so good.

To confirm the parallelism, let's fill in the blank with each of those two elements:

1) The first trenches cut {...} have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia..." - No issue here.
2) The first trenches cut {...} have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia..." - Again, no problem.

Each piece of the parallel list could work on its own (at least from a grammatical standpoint). And since both items have the same grammatical structure (adverb + preposition), they are perfectly parallel.

I hope that helps!
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2021
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
Thank yoy GMATNinja.
I understand it now!!! wuu!!
Director
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Posts: 533
Own Kudos [?]: 372 [1]
Given Kudos: 762
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V44
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Here is a full treatment of this question. Hope it helps someone, sometime
Quote:
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that... ❌❌

(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that... ❌

(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of... ❌❌

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but
Always look at the basics first: find the sentence core (the independent clauses), identify the verbs and their subjects, check subject-verb agreement, check pronouns.

BUT is a parallelism trigger, so we must check parallelism. In this sentence, the parallelism seems fine (more on that later).

The subject of this sentence is the first trenches. The first trenches...yields is a fatal error. Eliminate B and D at once.

C has two serious problem.
The first is that having been is used incorrectly. In no context will we use having done or having been without setting it off with commas (at least I cannot think of any context).
The second is the missing with after simultaneously. We cannot say societies arose simultaneously the more celebrated city states.
Eliminate C.

Next, we look at the differences between A and E.
Quote:
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but
- trenches that were cut is acceptable, but that were can be removed to make a crisper sentence

- Answer A seems to suffer from Progressivitis, the unnecessary use of the progressive tense. Societies that arose will work as well as or better than societies that were arising

- The most serious problem in A is evidence for....
We CAN say evidence for something, evidence of something and evidence against something, usually when we are talking of whether something EXISTS. We can also say evidence for someone and evidence against someone.
But in this sentence we are discussing whether something HAPPENED, and in such cases it is better to use evidence that followed by a clause that could be a complete sentence.

⬆️ So we have at least three reasons why E is better than A.

This is perfectly parallel and idiomatic: Societies arose simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states
- simultaneously with and independently of are parallel
- We need with after simultaneously . We cannot say societies arose simultaneously the more celebrated city states.
Both C and D can be eliminated because of the missing with.

-
Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Joined: 17 Jan 2022
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
Hi
i have doubt with option E.
"cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but"
"The first trenches cut into........." is a clause.
I think cut is a verb for the subject "first trenches"......Now in the same sentence, another verb "have yielded" too stands fr the subject "The first trenches"
So my doubt is hwo can there be two verb fr the same subject, when there is no connector.

Consider kudos if my post helps!!!!!

Archit

I think the "cut into a 500-acre site" is just a modifier of "The first trenches". I naturally would ignore it and read the sentence as "The first trenches haveyielded strong evidence........".
Director
Joined: 16 Jun 2021
Posts: 973
Own Kudos [?]: 188 [0]
Given Kudos: 309
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
jerrywu
The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but independently of the more celebrated city-states of southern Mesopotamia, in what is now southern Iraq.

(A) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence for centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East that were arising simultaneously with but

that in the begining modifies trenches no issues , have in the middle (present perfect tense ) no issues howerver towards the end of the sentence there is a modifier 'that ' in the end , bringing in a slight ambiguity whether it's refereing back to Middle east or the complex society , the modifier should have refered back to the cities , not the case here therefore we eleminate this option

(B) that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously with but also
no problem with the intial modifier 'that' , the sentence is constructed in simple past tense therefore there isn't acceptable reason to change the tense and bring in yields , in addition the 'but also' introduction is quircky therefore out

(C) having been cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East were arising simultaneously but
'having been ' is a straight out elemination since the change of tense is unacceptable and doesn't add much sense to the whole structure therefore out

(D) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, yields strong evidence of centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arising simultaneously but also
Similar reasoning as B , even though the absence of modifier in the begining doesn't alter the meaning a lot therefore out

(E) cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar, Syria, have yielded strong evidence that centrally administered complex societies in northern regions of the Middle East arose simultaneously with but
Hopee we like this !!!! the verb tense the meaning everything is fine therefore our answer

THerefore IMO E
Re: The first trenches that were cut into a 500-acre site at Tell Hamoukar [#permalink]
1   2   3   4
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7056 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts