Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 13:07 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 13:07
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
doe007
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Last visit: 03 May 2015
Posts: 232
Own Kudos:
880
 [27]
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 232
Kudos: 880
 [27]
10
Kudos
Add Kudos
17
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
doe007
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Last visit: 03 May 2015
Posts: 232
Own Kudos:
880
 [17]
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 232
Kudos: 880
 [17]
14
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Narenn
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 9,293
Own Kudos:
11,303
 [2]
Given Kudos: 4,711
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Test: Test
Posts: 9,293
Kudos: 11,303
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
HumptyDumpty
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Last visit: 07 Oct 2014
Posts: 142
Own Kudos:
552
 [2]
Given Kudos: 67
Location: Poland
Posts: 142
Kudos: 552
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
doe007
Research suggests that much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results from human contact with the saliva of the flying fox.
"Case" is countable, so we should use "many", not "much". For this reason alone A, B, and C are out.

(D) many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
Wordier than the original. Cumbersome syntax.
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result
Closer to the original and free of errors.
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,262
Own Kudos:
42,465
 [1]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,262
Kudos: 42,465
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here is a different stroke. The paramount question is what the thread is centrally concerned about. Whether it is the cases per se or the Nipah virus infection? As far as I see, the intended meaning of the example is to say that the infection is spread by the physical human contact with the saliva of the flying fox. Therefore, case or cases, it does not matter to us as they are all inessential modifiers, which can be ignored. The real issue is how to quantitatively describe infection, much or many? Obviously much, I guess. Thus one may see the irrelevance of using many in this contest. It is precisely for this reason I doubt the veracity of the OA, choice E; Choice E just mentions cases of Nipah virus but not its infection. This, IMO, is a fractured intent .

This is just my gut feeling, subject to comment and correction. But knowing Kaplan for its relish for ambiguity, I am not surprised this question leaves a yawning gap in perception. if infection is the core issue rather than the countability of cases, then A would be my preferred choice.
User avatar
aditi1903
Joined: 29 Apr 2012
Last visit: 21 Dec 2015
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
213
 [1]
Given Kudos: 47
Location: United States
Concentration: International Business, Real Estate
GMAT Date: 10-22-2012
Posts: 53
Kudos: 213
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
Here is a different stroke. The paramount question is what the thread is centrally concerned about. Whether it is the cases per se or the Nipah virus infection? As far as I see, the intended meaning of the example is to say that the infection is spread by the physical human contact with the saliva of the flying fox. Therefore, case or cases, it does not matter to us as they are all inessential modifiers, which can be ignored. The real issue is how to quantitatively describe infection, much or many? Obviously much, I guess. Thus one may see the irrelevance of using many in this contest. It is precisely for this reason I doubt the veracity of the OA, choice E; Choice E just mentions cases of Nipah virus but not its infection. This, IMO, is a fractured intent .

This is just my gut feeling, subject to comment and correction. But knowing Kaplan for its relish for ambiguity, I am not surprised this question leaves a yawning gap in perception. if infection is the core issue rather than the countability of cases, then A would be my preferred choice.


the question stem:
Research suggests that much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results from human contact with the saliva of the flying fox.

(A) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results
(B) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population result
(C) much of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(D) many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result


DAAGH: we need to take both CASES and NIPAH virus into consideration.
a: cases is countable so it has to be many but nipah virus has to be in human population ... creates confusion between nipah virus bein in human population or the documented cases in human population.
b: same error...much does not relate to plural cases, also have a look at results/result as an anomaly. it has to be either cases result or case results.
c:same error
d: many cases (correct) , documented IN HUMAN POPULATION.. (how can a case be documented in human population?? ) (incorrect) , result (correct)
e: many cases (correct) , nipah virus IN HUMAN POPULATION (correct...a virus can be in human population) , result(correct) ----- this is the best available choice out of five given ..


I hope it makes sense... Let me know if there's a problem.
User avatar
doe007
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Last visit: 03 May 2015
Posts: 232
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 232
Kudos: 880
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Answer explanation is posted right after the question. Link for the explanation is: research-suggests-that-much-of-the-documented-cases-of-nipah-152621.html#p1223724
User avatar
doe007
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Last visit: 03 May 2015
Posts: 232
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 232
Kudos: 880
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
Here is a different stroke. The paramount question is what the thread is centrally concerned about. Whether it is the cases per se or the Nipah virus infection? As far as I see, the intended meaning of the example is to say that the infection is spread by the physical human contact with the saliva of the flying fox. Therefore, case or cases, it does not matter to us as they are all inessential modifiers, which can be ignored. The real issue is how to quantitatively describe infection, much or many? Obviously much, I guess. Thus one may see the irrelevance of using many in this contest. It is precisely for this reason I doubt the veracity of the OA, choice E; Choice E just mentions cases of Nipah virus but not its infection. This, IMO, is a fractured intent .

This is just my gut feeling, subject to comment and correction. But knowing Kaplan for its relish for ambiguity, I am not surprised this question leaves a yawning gap in perception. if infection is the core issue rather than the countability of cases, then A would be my preferred choice.
You have done an nice analysis and there are points to be taken. I agree to your point that many of the Kaplan questions' correct answer choice contain ambiguity! Here, however, that may not be the case.

If the focus were on "infection", then the logical concern would have been the degree of the infection; in that case, number of Nipah virus infection would not have made sense as we would have dealt with only one type of infection, i.e., Nipah virus infection. Then the part "documented cases of" would have been a meaningless addition.

The concern here is different cases of Nipah virus infection -- the idea is to analyze different cases to find out the common cause of getting Nipah virus infection. Hence the question has a focus on "cases of Nipah virus infection".

I do agree that option E needs the word "infection" to make it perfect. Please see the detailed explanation on this question here: research-suggests-that-much-of-the-documented-cases-of-nipah-152621.html#p1223724
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,262
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,262
Kudos: 42,465
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
doe007, I do appreciate you point. I just mentioned another aspect of this episode. Let us say, for example, we have come across 200 registered cases of avian flu in some part of India. The bigger worry is the infection per se and how to contain it. Then the government insists that the remaining 20,000 birds have to manually killed (this killing is called culling). So an epidemic is not always a number game. The worry is that the Nipah Virus infection is just only type of virus and it manifests itself, as the WHO quotes “NiV infection in humans has a range of clinical presentations, from asymptomatic infection to acute respiratory syndrome and fatal encephalitis. NiV is also capable of causing disease in pigs and other domestic animals. There is no vaccine for either humans or animals. The primary treatment for human cases is intensive supportive care’


So I felt, the text is more bothered about the infection and its depth per se, rather than the numbers.
But the problem with Kaplan is that there are no definitive answers. And pondering over an issue inordinately does not lend to good practice. I do take your view as final, since the OA seems to say so.
User avatar
Amit1408GMAThunk
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Last visit: 10 Nov 2014
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 11
Products:
Posts: 34
Kudos: 26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer choice comes down between D & E and the correct answer finally is E.

The difference between D & E is that option D is the adjective form and option is the relative clause which makes it wordy and lengthy.

Adjective form is preferred over the noun form when the intended meaning is the same.

Hence OA is E.
User avatar
ankurgupta03
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Last visit: 07 Nov 2023
Posts: 1,371
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 833
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.35
WE:Consulting (Computer Software)
Products:
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
Posts: 1,371
Kudos: 1,850
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Research suggests that much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results from human contact with the saliva of the flying fox.

(A) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results
much cannot be used for the documents as they are countable
(B) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population result
much cannot be used for the documents as they are countable
(C) much of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
much cannot be used for the documents as they are countable
(D) many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
it seems that the infections are documented in the human population.
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result
Correct
User avatar
doe007
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Last visit: 03 May 2015
Posts: 232
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 232
Kudos: 880
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
doe007, I do appreciate you point. I just mentioned another aspect of this episode. Let us say, for example, we have come across 200 registered cases of avian flu in some part of India. The bigger worry is the infection per se and how to contain it. Then the government insists that the remaining 20,000 birds have to manually killed (this killing is called culling). So an epidemic is not always a number game. The worry is that the Nipah Virus infection is just only type of virus and it manifests itself, as the WHO quotes “NiV infection in humans has a range of clinical presentations, from asymptomatic infection to acute respiratory syndrome and fatal encephalitis. NiV is also capable of causing disease in pigs and other domestic animals. There is no vaccine for either humans or animals. The primary treatment for human cases is intensive supportive care’


So I felt, the text is more bothered about the infection and its depth per se, rather than the numbers.
But the problem with Kaplan is that there are no definitive answers. And pondering over an issue inordinately does not lend to good practice. I do take your view as final, since the OA seems to say so.
daagh, apologies for not replying early. What you are saying, that makes sense perfectly. I agree that in general we should be concerned with infections. Also I didn't like the construction "documented cases ... result" -- documented cases do not result from something -- correct sentence structure should imply the number of Nipah virus infected people who were contracted from the saliva of the flying fox. But, point to acknowledge is that we need to deal with the best option which may not be perfect one. :)
User avatar
avohden
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Last visit: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 405
Own Kudos:
3,202
 [1]
Given Kudos: 630
Status:1,750 Q's attempted and counting
Affiliations: University of Florida
Location: United States (FL)
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
GMAT 2: 610 Q44 V30
GMAT 3: 600 Q45 V29
GMAT 4: 590 Q35 V35
GPA: 3.45
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
GMAT 4: 590 Q35 V35
Posts: 405
Kudos: 3,202
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here is the official explanation from Kaplan

Scanning the choices, we see two major choices: (i) "much of the . . . cases" versus "many of the . . . cases"; and (ii) "results" versus "result". Since "cases" is a countable noun, "many" is correct. Therefore, we eliminate choices (A), (B) and (C). Also note that, for the "results" versus "result" issue, the relevant kernel is "many of the cases . . . result/results". Since "many of the cases" is plural, we need to use the plural "result".

Between (D) and (E), (E) is more economical (less wordy) and fixes both of the problems. So (E) is correct.
avatar
hoangyenle
Joined: 22 Feb 2014
Last visit: 10 Apr 2014
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 6
Kudos: 4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
Here is a different stroke. The paramount question is what the thread is centrally concerned about. Whether it is the cases per se or the Nipah virus infection? As far as I see, the intended meaning of the example is to say that the infection is spread by the physical human contact with the saliva of the flying fox. Therefore, case or cases, it does not matter to us as they are all inessential modifiers, which can be ignored. The real issue is how to quantitatively describe infection, much or many? Obviously much, I guess. Thus one may see the irrelevance of using many in this contest. It is precisely for this reason I doubt the veracity of the OA, choice E; Choice E just mentions cases of Nipah virus but not its infection. This, IMO, is a fractured intent .

This is just my gut feeling, subject to comment and correction. But knowing Kaplan for its relish for ambiguity, I am not surprised this question leaves a yawning gap in perception. if infection is the core issue rather than the countability of cases, then A would be my preferred choice.



I do agree with this point. In my opinion, it should be "the infection results from ST", rather than "many of the documented cases result from ST"
User avatar
aragonn
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Last visit: 30 Sep 2019
Posts: 1,170
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 416
Products:
Posts: 1,170
Kudos: 5,939
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
straight it have to be many not much so ans must be D or E
(A) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results
(B) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population result
(C) much of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(D) many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result

D,Well it looks like wordy, while E is more concise.

E it is !!!
User avatar
Nunuboy1994
Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Last visit: 24 Apr 2019
Posts: 554
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 167
Location: United States
Schools: Yale '18
GMAT 1: 650 Q43 V37
GRE 1: Q157 V158
GPA: 2.66
Schools: Yale '18
GMAT 1: 650 Q43 V37
GRE 1: Q157 V158
Posts: 554
Kudos: 126
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
doe007
Research suggests that much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results from human contact with the saliva of the flying fox.

(A) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results
(B) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population result
(C) much of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(D) many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result

E is correct because of the use of many and because it is the most concise.
avatar
rkoshlyak
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Last visit: 13 Oct 2018
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
29
 [1]
Given Kudos: 7
Posts: 14
Kudos: 29
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Research suggests that much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results from human contact with the saliva of the flying fox.

(A) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population results
(B) much of the documented cases of Nipah virus infection in the human population result
(C) much of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(D)many of the cases of Nipah virus infection that are documented in the human population result
(E) many of the documented cases of Nipah virus in the human population result

There are 3 splits:
many cases vs much cases
cases result vs cases results
documented cases vs infection that are documented (documented infection)
User avatar
Helium
Joined: 08 Jun 2013
Last visit: 01 Jun 2020
Posts: 452
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 118
Location: France
GMAT 1: 200 Q1 V1
GPA: 3.82
WE:Consulting (Other)
GMAT 1: 200 Q1 V1
Posts: 452
Kudos: 822
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The underlined portion of the sentence incorrectly uses the word "much" to describe the "cases" of the virus. The word "much" is only used for non-countable things. For countable things, the correct word is "many." For example, You will get many points on the GMAT. You will achieve much success. Points are countable; success is not. Additionally, since "many" is plural, the singular verb "results" will be incorrect. The sentence should read many ... result.

A vertical scan for the first word reveals a 3-2 split, with (A), (B), and (C) using "much," while (D) and (E) use "many." This useful split allows for the immediate elimination of the first three choices. A scan for the verb "results" is not as fruitful, as all of the choices except (A) use the correct "result."

(A), (B), and (C) can all be eliminated immediately, since they use the incorrect "much" to refer to the countable "cases."

(D) does fix the two errors noted in the initial analysis, but this sentence sounds like it is referring to infections of any species (not just humans), as long as they are documented in the human population. Compare this to the original sentence, which refers to cases of "infection in the human population." (D) ends up changing the meaning of the sentence and must be eliminated.

(E) corrects the two noted errors without adding any new errors. (E) is the correct answer.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,424
Own Kudos:
Posts: 19,424
Kudos: 1,010
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts