In its memo to the head of the investigative committee, the security

Question

In its memo to the head of the investigative committee, the security agency admitted that  no amount of time or powerful supercomputers  can isolate the prime numbers needed to decrypt the intercepted messages.

(A) no amount of time or powerful supercomputers

(B) neither vast amounts of time nor powerful supercomputers

(C) neither a vast amount of time nor powerful supercomputers

(D) neither vast amounts of time nor numbers of powerful supercomputers

(E) no matter how powerful the supercomputers or how vast the amount of time

Weekend Verbal Challenge Question! 
 https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=66410

txbcnvt · Answer

Is C wrong because of the presence of article 'a' before vast amount of time as time is uncountable. Is my understanding correct  KarishmaB

JenniferMassey · Answer

How could It be vast amounts of time . Time is an uncountable noun and therefore we used amount right?

Posted from my mobile device

PGPJr · Answer

Can someone please explain why C is better over B. I feel like vast "amounts" of time is incorrect. Kindly guide

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  PavanGPrabhu . I would approach the question from a parallelism and meaning perspective. First, it is odd to pair a singular element— a vast amount of time —with a plural one— powerful supercomputers , as we see in answer choice (C). In fact, answer choices (A) and (E) repeat such a singular-plural pairing in some way. The writing would be cleaner with matched elements. Then, from a meaning perspective,  a vast  timespan is one that can be defined, but how long would we care to make it? Ten thousand years? A million? An aeon? The point is, there are many interpretations of just what  vast  can mean in such a context. Meanwhile,  vast amounts of time  encompasses all such interpretations, and since  vast amounts  and  powerful supercomputers  are both plural, answer choice (B) is the safer bet.

This is a tough question, and I would not think twice about the iteration of the sentence with answer choice (C) inserted outside of a GMAT™ SC context. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

PyjamaScientist · Answer

Hi  PavanGPrabhu , 
Though  AndrewN  has masterfully responded to your query, if you want to look at an official question that encompasses same logic, then  click here.

Posted from my mobile device

AndrewN · Answer

Thank you for pointing out that question,  PyjamaScientist , one I had not looked at since December. Indeed, it is clear that the other question must have served as the template for this one.  I have called out Veritas  for putting out this sort of material before, and I will continue to decry the practice until I am red in the face (metaphorically, of course). Yes, students should study the official question over this spinoff, which achieves nothing in the way of a teaching opportunity that the original does not. For reference:

I wish prep company employees would dedicate their apparently superior intellectual skills to creating original work. The whole industry would benefit.

- Andrew

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

Short answer:

There's nothing clearly wrong with either choice.

It's a busted question.

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

Notice that we can have multiple "amounts" of an uncountable thing.

In other words, "amount" works with "time," and then the sentence is about multiple "amounts" of uncountable "time."

AndrewN · Answer

Precisely. For anyone who stumbles upon this thread, you will notice in my first post above that I did not say that  amount  was incorrect, nor that the pairing of a singular element in answer choice (C)— a vast amount —with a plural element— powerful supercomputers —was incorrect. Rather, I meant to emphasize that in a GMAT™ setting, if I were to see answer choices (B) and (C) side by side, I would  disfavor  (C) for the reasons I stated.

This question should serve as a cautionary tale to question-writers for why tweaking official questions sometimes does not lead to a GMAT™-like question. The differences between the answer choices in the source material are more pronounced and better reasoned.

- Andrew

wickedvikram · Answer

So far, I completely agree with your views. The sentence itself does not present any critical distinction that may point to any particular preference between "amount of" and "amounts of".

regarding the parallel structure argument. "Either/or" and "neither/nor" can take singular, plural and both in a sentence.
e.g. Neither Mary nor her friends like eating ice cream.

Hi  Bunuel  - Could you please shed more light on this and/or share official explanation.

Thanks.

In its memo to the head of the investigative committee, the security

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

In its memo to the head of the investigative committee, the security

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards