GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Apr 2019, 09:34

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

Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to

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

Hide Tags

 
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1625
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 01:08
3
1
11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

82% (01:05) correct 18% (01:23) wrong based on 342 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt emission limits that would be far stricter than the federal rules.

(A) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt
(B) to impose new controls on truck and bus engines' pollution by the joint adoption of
(C) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines by jointly adopting
(D) for imposing new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines, and jointly adopting
(E) for imposing new controls on truck and bus engine pollution in the joint adoption of

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/20/us/13-states-to-unite-to-cut-truck-emissions.html

Thirteen states from all regions of the country will try to impose new national controls on pollution from truck and bus engines on Monday, when they announce a plan to jointly adopt emission limits that would be far stricter than the federal rules.

_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 17
Location: Delhi, India
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 01:22
D for me.
A) To impose..... in that is awkward
B) Pollution by... should be pollution from
C) Adopting does not agree with rest of the sentence
E) Imposing......and adoption do not agree
_________________
-Albert
My GMAT Preparation: http://albertrahul.blogspot.com/search/label/GMAT
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 118
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 01:23
As ugly as it is, I'm going with D.

This is tricky because the use of "jointly adopting" indicates that there are TWO separate things being adopted here.

A. "in that they will jointly" is wordy/awkward. Also, "they" has an unclear referent - could be states, controls, or engines.
B. "to impose...by the joint adoption of..." is unclear. The use of "joint adoption" in here isn't clear as to what TWO things are being adopted. If it were just adopting new emission limits (ONE thing), then no need to add "joint adoption".
C. Same as B. Why add "jointly" here? In this example, the states are only adopting stricter emission limits.
D. This clearly separates TWO issues: imposing new controls on truck/bus engines AND adopting stricter emission limits. "imposing...adopting..." is also parallel.
E. "in the joint adoption of stricter emission limits" -- again, where is the JOINT? Where is the other thing?

I don't personally like "a plan for imposing...." but in this case it works.

sondenso wrote:
74. Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt emission limits that would be far stricter than the federal rules.

(A) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt
(B) to impose new controls on truck and bus engines' pollution by the joint adoption of
(C) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines by jointly adopting
(D) for imposing new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines, and jointly adopting
(E) for imposing new controls on truck and bus engine pollution in the joint adoption of
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 491
Location: Eastern Europe
Schools: Oxford
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 12:48
I’ll also pick C.

Not quite sure, but I think that in (D), it should be “a plan for imposing new controls…” “and for jointly adopting…” (without comma); otherwise it’s not parallel.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 118
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 18:24
Ah crap! I originally picked D but the answer has got to be C. Here's why...

I originally thought that "jointly" was indicating that there are TWO things being adopted in this instance. That's why I went with D the first time because it clearly separates TWO things: imposing new controls on truck/bus engines AND adopting emission limits.

However, this is not really correct and actually alters the intent of the sentence. "Jointly" in this context isn't referring to two separate things, instead, it is referring to the "Thirteen states from all regions" who JOINTLY (meaning, all together as a group) adopt stricter emission limits.

So here we go for C:

Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines by jointly adopting emission limits that would be far stricter than the federal rules

There's my explanation. I always felt that "a plan to impose" just sounds better than "a plan for imposing" as another side note. Ugh tricky question! :)

sondenso wrote:
74. Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt emission limits that would be far stricter than the federal rules.

(A) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines in that they will jointly adopt
(B) to impose new controls on truck and bus engines' pollution by the joint adoption of
(C) to impose new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines by jointly adopting
(D) for imposing new controls on pollution from truck and bus engines, and jointly adopting
(E) for imposing new controls on truck and bus engine pollution in the joint adoption of
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1625
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jun 2008, 18:40
Racouteur, the second explaination does really help!

raconteur wrote:
I always felt that "a plan to impose" just sounds better than "a plan for imposing"


Agree, I elimilate right away D and E. But I ignore C, even though it sounds best, because somebody here say "joinly" cannot modify noun-adopting.

raconteur wrote:
Thirteen states from all regions" who JOINTLY (meaning, all together as a group) adopt stricter emission limits.


Thanks for this finding. OA is C
_________________
Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 634
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2017, 06:36
2
The correct idiom in this context is ‘plan to impose’ … this eliminates D and E.

This sentence needs a common construction: ‘by + verb-ing’. 'By' is used when you describe the method used to accomplish (HOW) something - exactly what is done in this sentence. The sentence is explaining how the states are going to accomplish the stated goal.

If we say:

You should study daily. By doing so, you will improve consistently.

Or

One can’t become smarter by facing the same challenges every day.

A and B are wrong because they don’t use ‘by + verb-ing’ constructions.

Correct: C
_________________
Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch
Intern
Intern
User avatar
S
Joined: 29 Dec 2018
Posts: 26
Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 30 Mar 2019, 23:45
According to what Ron said in the video 20120216--Use of -ING forms.

I have dedicated my career to the exposure of injustice in the court system.

--> I am somehow involved with the exposure of injustice, but not necessarily directly (e.g., maybe I donate $ to a charity that does this)

I have dedicated my career to exposing of injustice in the court system.

--> I am the one who has actually been exposing injustice.

Verbal nouns (like "the exposure") are IMPERSONAL: they *don't* convey the idea that the subject is directly involved.

Gerunds generally *do* convey the idea that the subject is directly involved in the process.

In this question, the 13 states are actually the entities that are going to adopt emissions restrictions.

Originally posted by MartinTao on 29 Mar 2019, 22:49.
Last edited by MartinTao on 30 Mar 2019, 23:45, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 635
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2019, 00:59
MartinTao wrote:
According to what Ron said during the video 20120216--Use of -ING forms.

I have dedicated my career to the exposure of injustice in the court system.

--> I am somehow involved with the exposure of injustice, but not necessarily directly (e.g., maybe I donate $ to a charity that does this)

I have dedicated my career to exposing of injustice in the court system.

--> I am the one who has actually been exposing injustice.

Verbal nouns (like "the exposure") are IMPERSONAL: they *don't* convey the idea that the subject is directly involved.

Gerunds generally *do* convey the idea that the subject is directly involved in the process.

In this question, the 13 states are actually the entities that are going to adopt emissions restrictions.


your point is great. I want to comment

doing can refer to subject or a noun in sentence, depending on the idiomatic pattern . it is not alway that doing can refer to the subject or a noun in a sentence. this point make english harder .

I invest in stocks by reading business books
i read the book for learning english
I do not learn english here. learning here is still general

my dicussion is somehow not relevant to our problem because on gmat we do not need to be so far. just know that normal noun and doing can be different in that the first dose not refer to any subject while the second do.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to   [#permalink] 30 Mar 2019, 00:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Thirteen states from all regions of the country announced a plan to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.