Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 27 Sep 2026, 05:07 |
It is currently 27 Sep 2026, 05:07 |
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 2701:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Sep 2807:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 28, 2026 - Oct. 16, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Sep 2911:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
" Description: Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thur Sept. 29, 2026 - Dec. 3, 2026, 11:00am-1:00pm EST
Oct 0102:00 AM EDT
-03:00 AM EDT
Tejas studied hard but kept repeating the same mistakes. After 3 attempts at 645, a focused 4-week strategy helped him identify and fix what was holding him back—leading to a 695 with just 12–15 hours of study per week.
Oct 0107:00 AM BST
-08:00 AM GMT
Welcome to the GMAT Club's Free Interview Prep Event for Top MBA Programs! Buy tickets - Virtual series that’s all set to equip you to -excel in your MBA interviews.
Oct 0301:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Saturdays Oct. 3, 2026 - Dec. 26, 2026, 1:00pm-4:00pm EST
30 Jul 2021, 23:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
DmitryFarber
sorry for colour marking.
In short ,
C says: the particulars of the plan HAVE-- i got it why is it wrong
D says: the particulars of the plan DO -- this is clear.
can i also read D as:
the particulars of the plan CAN HAVE/COULD HAVE
My question : Can DO be replaced with can have/could have.
Thanks DmitryFarber
31 Jul 2021, 15:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
mSKR
We should read DO as repeating the previous verb "have." The "could" part applies to the whole clause. It COULD BE that one thing will have greater significance than another, but we're not sure. If we were to "distribute" the word COULD to both terms, we'd be implying a limit to what is possible, as in "a bear can reach higher than a fox can." If the author intended that, they'd need to make the meaning clear by repeating the word COULD.
We should read DO as repeating the previous verb "have." The "could" part applies to the whole clause. It COULD BE that one thing will have greater significance than another, but we're not sure. If we were to "distribute" the word COULD to both terms, we'd be implying a limit to what is possible, as in "a bear can reach higher than a fox can." If the author intended that, they'd need to make the meaning clear by repeating the word COULD.
Updated on: 31 May 2022, 02:06
Originally posted by thangvietnam on 11 Aug 2021, 04:36.
Last edited by thangvietnam on 31 May 2022, 02:06, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by thangvietnam on 31 May 2022, 02:06, edited 2 times in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
batliwala
two main points of comparison are tested here.
first point.
if the main clause contain both subject and other element, such as object or complement (forget the grammatical terms. think that there is another term besides the subject), there is a chance of ambiguity. this means the comparison can be between two subject or two other elements
the principles have greater importance than the particulars of the plan
the main clause has 2 elements, subject "principles" and "importance". if the second part of comparison dose not contain do/did or helping verb, the ambiguity can happen. in above sentence , two meaning can be understood. principle have greater importance than the particulars do. or, principle have importance greater than the particulars.
if there is only subject. no ambiguity happens
I am taller than he.
this if fine, we dont need "he is" because there is no ambiguity.
second point
this is about do/did or helping verb.
if we see a verb phrase contain 2 part , "could/may/might + another form of verb", the second part comparison can have 2 meanings , meaning of could/may /might and meaning of the the other form of verb.
the principle could have greater significance than the particular of the plan could have
the priciple could have greater sigificance than the particulars of the plan do ̣̣(have)
we need could/may/might , helping verb or do/did, to make which meaning you want to show.
so, 2 elements in the main clause or 2 parts in the verb phrase can make 2 meanings. make meaning clear by adding do/did or helping verb could/may/might /have
going to answer choices.
choice c and d are wrong because "have" in the second part of comparison is helping verb. we need a form of "to have" , maybe in different tense, in the first clause to make "have" correct. for example
I had learned gmat like you have.
this is correct. "have" in the second part is good because we have "had" in the first part.
if the second part of comparison contain helping verb, the first part of comparison must contain the same helping verb, maybe in different tense. this is what Ron said
if we want "have" in choice c and e work as an action verb, we must replace "have" with "do/did". choice d do this job.
choice a and b are wrong because there are more than 1 elements in the first part and so, this make ambiguity. when we see many elements, find do/did or helping verb to make meaning clear. this rule makes us quickly find the errors
09 Apr 2022, 04:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
DmitryFarber
Hi DmitryFarber vineetgupta RonPurewal
This post is really very helpful. However, I came across another official question in which present perfect tense/ linking verb logic does not work. Can you please throw some light on this?
) 
