Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 08:11 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 08:11
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
User avatar
Crytiocanalyst
Joined: 16 Jun 2021
Last visit: 27 May 2023
Posts: 950
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 309
Posts: 950
Kudos: 208
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
woohoo921
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 516
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 623
Posts: 516
Kudos: 142
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,784
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Tanchat
Joined: 31 Jan 2020
Last visit: 20 Jun 2023
Posts: 222
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 139
Posts: 222
Kudos: 20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mymba99
There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.


(A) There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

(B) There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished.

(C) There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.

(D) Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished.

(E) Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished.


Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

What does "as" in (A) mean "while" ?
avatar
SanJain
Joined: 23 Apr 2020
Last visit: 26 Jul 2022
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 42
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
in option A, it says
" There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing."

Their is used for plural subject. As per sentence overfishing will deplete monkfish and not cod/haddock. Monkfish is singular. "Its" should have been used instead of "their".

Can anyone please clarify?
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SanJain

Their is used for plural subject. As per sentence overfishing will deplete monkfish and not cod/haddock. Monkfish is singular.
When the sentence mentions "size" of monkfish, the sentence is not talking about the "physical size" but the "number" of monkfish.

Hence, through this context, it can be concluded that "monkfish" is used in a plural context here.
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,765
 [1]
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,765
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SanJain
in option A, it says
" There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing."

Their is used for plural subject. As per sentence overfishing will deplete monkfish and not cod/haddock. Monkfish is singular. "Its" should have been used instead of "their".

Can anyone please clarify?

Hello SanJain,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, in this context "monkfish" is a plural noun.

"fish" can be either plural or singular depending on context, and the more obviously plural noun "fishes" is typically used, specifically, in referring to multiple different types of fish.

This same rule applies to the names of specific species of fish as well.

For example, "The fishmonger has about five salmon left in stock." and "The fishmonger sells two salmons - pink salmon and Atlantic salmon."

The first sentence refers to salmon, in general, so "salmon" is used as a plural noun; the second sentence refers to two types of salmon, so "salmons" is used.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
test9032
Joined: 01 Sep 2022
Last visit: 29 Oct 2022
Posts: 18
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 18
Kudos: 5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

AndrewN GMATNinja MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun RonTargetTestPrep

Is the comparison in Option (C) correct?

(C) There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.

legal limits
1) on the size of cod and hammock
2) for monkfish (that can be caught)

Is the comparison logical?

Also, is the "that can be caught implied"?

Thanks
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,765
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
test9032
Hi,

AndrewN GMATNinja MartyTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun RonTargetTestPrep

Is the comparison in Option (C) correct?

(C) There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.

legal limits
1) on the size of cod and hammock
2) for monkfish (that can be caught)

Is the comparison logical?

Also, is the "that can be caught implied"?

Thanks

Hello test9032,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, no; the comparison is not logical; Option C seems to be comparing the "size of cod and hammock" to "monkfish".

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Fido10
Joined: 12 Aug 2020
Last visit: 27 Aug 2024
Posts: 103
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 298
Location: Morocco
Products:
Posts: 103
Kudos: 165
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
pruekv
Hi GMAT Experts,

Can anyone please help explain what the clause "a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing," modifies? And if it is a modifier, why doesn't the "touch rule" applies here?

Thank you!
pruekv
The "circumstance" referred to is the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught. And I wouldn't call this part ("circumstance...") a modifier. Instead, it's just some additional, comma-separated, information (i.e. "Che Guevara was a revolutionary, a man who changed the course of history in Latin America.")

The construction in choice (A) is really just an alternative for something like this:

    "There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught. This circumstance contributes to their depletion through overfishing."

If you are okay with that last pair of sentences, then you should be okay with choice (A)!


GMATNinja, Is that part what we call "Absolute Phrase" ?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,784
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Fido10
GMATNinja
pruekv
Hi GMAT Experts,

Can anyone please help explain what the clause "a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing," modifies? And if it is a modifier, why doesn't the "touch rule" applies here?

Thank you!
pruekv
The "circumstance" referred to is the fact that there are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught. And I wouldn't call this part ("circumstance...") a modifier. Instead, it's just some additional, comma-separated, information (i.e. "Che Guevara was a revolutionary, a man who changed the course of history in Latin America.")

The construction in choice (A) is really just an alternative for something like this:

    "There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught. This circumstance contributes to their depletion through overfishing."

If you are okay with that last pair of sentences, then you should be okay with choice (A)!

[url=https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja%5D%5Bb%5DGMATNinja%5B/b%5D%5B/url%5D, Is that part what we call "Absolute Phrase" ?
I assume you're asking about the phrase, "a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing." And if we think of an absolute phrase as a modifier consisting of a noun + a noun modifier, then sure, it certainly seems like it qualifies.

I've also seen an absolute phrase defined as a modifier consisting of a noun + a participle, but it seems silly to give a different name to the phrase, "a circumstance contributing to their depletion," because it's doing the same exact thing as the one above!

The takeaway: the technical jargon doesn't matter! What matters is that you understand what role a given construction is playing.

For more on absolute phrases and their cousins, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHT4Yew8TH8.

I hope that clears things up!
User avatar
Raman109
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

Option Elimination -

(A) There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing. - Okay. "They're" referring to "monkfish." The reference to a collective noun can be singular or plural based on the context. Let me share an example.
If we say, "The Oneida is a Native American tribe in New York," we refer to "The Oneida" as a collective entity.
But if we say, "The Oneida are known for their long-standing cultures and traditions," we refer to the group's members (individually).

Likewise, here, we refer to the group's (monkfish's) members/fish.
Moreover, had this been a single monkfish, we would have had an article "a" for general monkfish or "the" for a specific monkfish, which we don't have here.

"a circumstance ....." is a flexible modifier that modifies the earlier clause: "There are no legal limits....."

(B) There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished. - unlike "cod or haddock" is compared with "There are no legal limits on the size" - wrong.

(C) There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing. - When referring to the individual members of the collective noun, we need to use "their" and not "its" as used here. Wrong. Moreover, "which" here refers to "monkfish." So, does "monkfish" contribute to its depletion? Doesn't make sense. Wrong.

(D) Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished. - The same issue as B. "which" again refers to "monkfish."

(E) Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished. It's not exactly the same, but it's a similar issue as in B.
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
189 posts