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

 It is currently 14 Aug 2018, 06:44

### 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

# Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

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

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1231
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 25 Oct 2017, 20:55
4
1
13
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

81% (01:06) correct 19% (01:17) wrong based on 1050 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Edit: This discussion has retired. Find the new thread HERE

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

Why E is better than D?

Originally posted by goalsnr on 15 Jul 2008, 11:45.
Last edited by HKD1710 on 25 Oct 2017, 20:55, edited 3 times in total.
underlined
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 260
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 11:54
1
1
goalsnr wrote:
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

Why E is better than D?

Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps
_________________

The world is continuous, but the mind is discrete

Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 241
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 12:05
Just another rule, place the modifies as close as possible to the clause that modifies it. Hence D. Whereby is just redundent here.
VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1329
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 12:06
where by is clearly redundant. If you ask the Q Under a provision of the Constitution that has never been applied, it should modify congress and not the situation/time congress is in.

E stands out better than D
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1231
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 16:16
vdhawan1 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
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

Why E is better than D?

Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps

I would agree with your explanation if there were no "." after "applied in answer choice E.
The source of this SC is GMATTer.May be its a typo
Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 241
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 16:37
goalsnr wrote:
vdhawan1 wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
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

Why E is better than D?

Ok a disclaimer at the outset ..i m no expert at it but here is my line of reasoning as to why E is better than D

If we see carefully, the only difference between D and E is usage of 'whereby' ...if we go back to the concept of 3Cs as per Manhattan we would not want to pick up D because E is a more [u]succinit [/u]choice as compared to D

I hope this helps

I would agree with your explanation if there were no "." after "applied in answer choice E.
The source of this SC is GMATTer.May be its a typo

Lol yes...my eyes failed to notice the full stop. I registered it as a comma....he he....yea i guess it is a typo.....
SVP
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1728
Location: New York
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 21:32
Because of "fullstop" I chose.. D.. If it is comma.. then will go for 'E'
_________________

Smiling wins more friends than frowning

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1231
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2008, 15:44
Folks,
I saw this SC in the OG. The "." in E is a typo.

OA is E
Director
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 601
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2008, 18:13
"whereby" doesn't fit

"Under a provision Congress is required" sounds right whereas "under a provision whereby Congress is required" is very awkward.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 431
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2009, 15:17
goalsnr wrote:
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

Why E is better than D?

Seems like the OA is E. My question is, why is past perfect preferred to simple past?
_________________

-Underline your question. It takes only a few seconds!
-Search before you post.

Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2010
Posts: 51
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2011, 20:44
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1125
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2011, 21:16
Between options D and E,whereby is unnecessary in option D.Hence E stands apart.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 249
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 May 2011, 00:58
prasforgmat wrote:
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?

I was also wandering for the same, here is what wiki has to say...

Use of whereby as a formal equivalent of where is nonstandard and is avoided by careful speakers and writers, who use where or in which instead. The term typically fails readability and comprehension review so it is generally avoided in published works. The term is also avoided by speakers as it makes it difficult to understand the message that is trying to be communicated.

After reading the the above & the way GMAC evaluate sentences use of whereby raises a red flag at first place!
_________________

My GMAT Journey 540->680->730!

~ When the going gets tough, the Tough gets going!

Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 63
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2011, 00:44
1
Q. 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

_________________

---Winners do it differently---

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4522
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2011, 00:57
3
1
Because you cannot find a suitable referent for the pronoun it, choices A, B, and C are gone. Between D and E, D is a fragment without a working verb. The conjunction whereby spoils the show for D. E survives
_________________

you can know a lot about something and not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Posts: 64
Location: India
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2011, 01:14
1
Hi,

was never applied, has been - incorrect tense match. A, B and C are out
preposition + noun should be the correct form.
Under...., congress.. is the right choice. Hence E

Thanks
Sony
_________________

A bend in the road is not the end of the road unless you fail to take a turn.....

Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 74
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Aug 2011, 18:20
1
RohitKalla wrote:
Q. 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

A, B and C are out because it should be "has never been applied". Between D and E, D is out because "whereby" is awkward. That leaves E.
Manager
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 170
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, International Business
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.6
WE: Project Management (Computer Software)
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2011, 09:55
Agreeing with the explanation, also chose E
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-guide-to-the-official-guide-13-for-gmat-review-134210.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1358
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2011, 06:20
1
+1 E

We don't have a specific date in the past. We need present perfect.
"whereby" subordinates the clause. We wouldn't have a main clause in D.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 224
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2011, 03:40
yogesh1984 wrote:
prasforgmat wrote:
I chose E but I was wondering

- OG12 says whereby makes sentence fragmented so D is wrong. Can anybody explain why?

I was also wandering for the same, here is what wiki has to say...

Use of whereby as a formal equivalent of where is nonstandard and is avoided by careful speakers and writers, who use where or in which instead. The term typically fails readability and comprehension review so it is generally avoided in published works. The term is also avoided by speakers as it makes it difficult to understand the message that is trying to be communicated.

After reading the the above & the way GMAC evaluate sentences use of whereby raises a red flag at first place!

When we use 'whereby' it means that sentence is not complete. The first part of the sentence already begins with 'Under' which again does not complete the sentence. Hence, we should not have 'whereby' in the second part. If we had something else after the second part or if the first part were able to complete the sentence, usage of 'whereby' would have correct, probably.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never &nbs [#permalink] 31 Dec 2011, 03:40

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 34 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Under a provision of the Constitution that was never

 post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

# Events & Promotions

 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®.