This April, three out of seven people will file tax returns with the

This April, three out of seven people will file tax returns with the use of a disk found in software stores and accounting texts.

A) tax returns with the use of a disk found in software stores and accounting texts

"using a disk" in option D sounds better and concise than "with the use of"

B) tax returns with disks found in software stores and accounting texts

Meaning error. Do they include disks in the tax return ? INCORRECT

C) a tax return with disks found in a software store or an accounting text

Meaning error. Do they include disks in the tax return ? INCORRECT

D) tax returns using a disk found in a software store and an accounting text

"using" verb+ing modifier correctly describes how the action in previous clause is done

E) a tax return with a disk they find in a software store and an accounting text

Meaning error. Do they include disks in the tax return ? INCORRECT

Hence I chose option D

There is a 3-2 split between (A), (B), and (D), which begin with the plural "tax returns," and (C) and (E), which begin with the singular "a tax return." Also, (A) and (B) end with "software stores and accounting texts," (C) ends with "a software store or an accounting text," and (D) and (E) end with "a software store and an accounting text."

Eliminate (A) on the basis of the multiple tax returns filed, apparently, on the single disk. This sentence does not clearly express the author's intended idea.

(C) and (E) have "three out of seven people" filing "a tax return." However, each person would file his or her own tax return. (C) also indicates that such disks are found in either a store or a text rather than in both places, and (E) says that each disk is found in both places, which doesn't make sense.

(D) uses the plural "tax returns," but it has the same problem as (E) in placing a single disk in two locations. Eliminate.

(B) is correct because it logically says that certain people will file tax returns with disks and that such disks can be found in software stores and accounting texts.

A,D,E - "A disk" signaling that they all use single disk. Meaning issue.
C- Similar logic can be applied to the "accounting Text".

Hence, B is the Answer.

I disagree with the OA. In B there is a significant meaning error. 'Disks found in software stores and accounting texts may mean that the said disks are found in both software stores and accounting texts. D solves this problem and clearly states that the disk is found in a software store and an accounting text needs to be consulted separately.

Three out of seven : is plural and is correct.

Now, I see many flaws in this problem.
1. Are all three people using same disk or accounting text?
2. will file tax returns using a disk ....In my opinion, a comma must be there between tax returns and using. Otherwise it is indicating that "tax returns using..." is single entity.
3. will file tax returns with disks.....It is indicating that people are filing "tax returns with disks..."

So neither B nor D seems correct to me.

Is the correct answer B or D

ANS given is B while the explanation given by many users says D

hello experts, please help us choose between b and d in this question.

I am confused as to whether B or D is the correct answer. Pls confirm

in D] whats the error. parallelism looks fine to me across 'and'

Honestly, I did not understand the meaning of the sentence. what does it trying to convey.

usage of 'with' looked awkward to me where as D] has a nice -ing verbal

There are singular/plural noun splits all over this problem, so we'll definitely have to think about those.

Unlike singular/plural verb splits, which usually signal a subject-verb agreement issue, most singular/plural noun splits have to do with meaning and common-sense logic.

That's the case here. This sentence is about how "three out of seven people" will file their annual tax returns.
Mathematically that's a proportion—not a statement about three literal people—but it's written the same way as a statement about three actual people would be.
Three people filing tax returns will file three separate returns, so we want plural nouns here. Only choice B makes all three nouns (returns, disks, texts) plural, so that's all we need here.





Hah... it does seem pretty old, doesn't it? Floppy disks... 😂😂

The meaning of the sentence is that 3/7 of people will file electronic returns. According to this sentence—which must have been written in the 1990s—the required software comes on floppy disks that are distributed through computer retailers.

In any case, I can definitely understand why you'd have trouble with this sentence. The average full-time business-school applicant is 27 years old—so, this year, the average applicant will have been born around 1995. Almost certainly too young to remember floppy disks!





"With ______" is very commonly used to name the tool, method, technique, or other means by which the sentence's subject accomplishes something. I'm sure you've seen this type of modifier many times.

Also... When it's used as it is here, "using"—like "including"—functions as a preposition, not as a typical _ing construction.

To the red part: No. Reading "software stores" and "accounting texts" as parallel is a nonsense interpretation.

If a sentence has 'two interpretations', one of which makes sense and the other of which is total crazytown nonsense, then that sentence actually DOESN'T have two interpretations. It just has one (the one that actually makes sense).
A sentence is only ambiguous if it's ACTUALLY, GENUINELY ambiguous—in other words, if it's actually impossible to decide between two potential interpretations.

Absurd/nonsensical interpretations DO NOT COUNT as 'alternative interpretations' and CANNOT create 'ambiguity'. If you come up with any interpretations that make no sense, just ignore them.

Ideally, your thought processes should be anchored firmly enough in real-world common sense that you won't actually think of weird nonsensical interpretations! But, if you do, don't pay any attention to them.




Those singular nouns aren't compatible with plural "tax returns".

"Three out of seven people" does not mean literally 3 individuals. That's a way of expressing a proportion, meaning 3/7 of all filers.
Even if your attention lapses and you just absent-mindedly read "three" and "seven" as literal numbers, you should still instantly reject that interpretation—because it's crazy (it implies that the TOTAL number of people filing tax returns is just seven).





This is a non-issue. The GMAT does NOT test the presence/absence of single commas.

Moreover, as I mentioned in a previous post, you shouldn't think of "using" as a normal _ing form. Functionally, it's actually a preposition, which acts in essentially the same way as "with" to introduce the tool/method/means by which the subject accomplishes whatever is described.





Nope. This interpretation makes no sense, so you should reject it. Remember, nonsense interpretations are not valid, They have NO impact.
Most importantly, a 'second possible meaning' that's nonsensical or absurd DOES NOT COUNT as a second meaning. Please see the post directly above this one for more on this important point.

This situation, in which there's just one interpretation that makes sense but there are also nonsense interpretations, obtains especially often for prepositional phrases (such as "with ___", under consideration here).
If you mistakenly believe that nonsense interpretations can actually make a sentence ambiguous, then you're going to get into a lot of trouble with prepositional phrases—lots of which can modify EITHER a noun OR an action/clause. To make that distinction, you'll usually have to invoke common sense.

E.g.,

Did you read the signs at the airport? —> Here, "at the airport" modifies "signs". (Airports have signs that are permanent fixtures, i.e., signs at the airport.)

Did you read your book at the airport? —> This time, "at the airport" modifies your action of reading the book. (Books are not permanently installed into the walls and ceilings of airports, so there's no such thing as "book at the airport".)

You can see how the reasoning you were using is going to cause major problems, right? If you were to use the same (erroneous) reasoning on these two sentences, you would wrongly conclude that they're both 'ambiguous'.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.