It is currently 16 Dec 2017, 05:20

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

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

Author Message
Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 684

Kudos [?]: 629 [0], given: 0

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Feb 2008, 04:14
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

I got the answer right, but I want to be sure the logic behind getting to the answer is right- laws,provisions and other universal truths are all present perfect and thus I opted for -has never been(E), D was ruled out as "whereby" suggests the provision not being used requires congress to require a call - is this correct?

regards,
Prasanna
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 629 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 574

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Re: SC 1000- 882/1000 -> Clarification [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Feb 2008, 10:45
I would go with E

A-C sound akward, and D doesn't flow right

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 780

Kudos [?]: 191 [0], given: 0

Re: SC 1000- 882/1000 -> Clarification [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Feb 2008, 11:56
do it is always wrong – requires to do so – eliminate A, B and C

(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it

(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally

(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so [Whereby = by means of which – implies provision of constitution that was never applied, by means of which congress … - changing the meaning of the sentence – eliminate it]

(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

Kudos [?]: 191 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 684

Kudos [?]: 629 [0], given: 0

Re: SC 1000- 882/1000 -> Clarification [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Feb 2008, 22:07
Thanks
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 629 [0], given: 0

Re: SC 1000- 882/1000 -> Clarification   [#permalink] 20 Feb 2008, 22:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.