Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 17:10

### 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
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1348
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 679 [1] , given: 10

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

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 11:45
1
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

80% (02:09) correct 20% (01:19) wrong based on 797 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

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Why E is better than D?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Harley1980 on 22 Jun 2015, 08:36, edited 1 time in total.
Hided spoiler
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 276
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 11:54
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

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

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: 1409
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 388 [0], given: 1

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: 1348
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 679 [0], given: 10

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
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

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: 1805
Location: New York
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 934 [0], given: 5

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: 1348
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 679 [0], given: 10

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: 624
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 1

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: 461
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 4

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: 78
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 11

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: 1331
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 254 [0], given: 10

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 !!

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 279
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 23

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!

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 256
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 20

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 256
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 20

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

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2011, 03:44
vscid 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?

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

We use present perfect to refer to something that happened in the past but still relevant to present. Because the second part in all choices indicates the present tense, it implies that not-applicability-of-the-provision still holds good now and hence we need to use present perfect.
_________________

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

Current Student
Joined: 20 Jan 2014
Posts: 176
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 120

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

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2014, 08:14
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?

Choce D is wrong because it does not have any independent clause. Whereby means "in which".
_________________

Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2014
Posts: 72
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 102

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

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2014, 06:13
Can anyone explain why "was never applied" is wrong in A , B & C?
_________________

Press KUDOs if you find my explanation helpful

Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 800
Followers: 368

Kudos [?]: 748 [2] , given: 5

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

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2014, 13:23
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
TARGET730 wrote:
Can anyone explain why "was never applied" is wrong in A , B & C?

"was never applied" is wrong because it's an incorrect tense. Using the past tense implies that the provision can't be applied anymore because it or the constitution doesn't exist anymore. The provision still exists and the Constitution that still stands, so the provision could still be applied. We need to used the present perfect tense "has never been applied" to suggest a beginning in the past but effects that are still ongoing.

KW
_________________

Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2013
Posts: 348
GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 188 [1] , given: 403

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

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2015, 06:38
1
KUDOS
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?

D is wrong because in D , there is no Main clause .D does not make a complete sentence.

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied has never been applied= Dependent clause
whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so= Dependent clause

Whereby = in which

Ony E clears this sentence fragmentation and also other errors.

E is a complete sentence.
Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied has never been applied= Dependent clause
Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so= Main clause...

( page 239 and 303 of verbal review 2nd edition.)
_________________

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.

I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10304
Followers: 1001

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2016, 00:06
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.
Re: Under a provision of the Constitution that was never   [#permalink] 26 Mar 2016, 00:06

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 25 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 According to the Constitution 4 01 Mar 2014, 20:01
1 Under the provisions of the United States Constitution and 8 21 May 2014, 06:19
6 Q. Under a provision of the Constitution that was never 9 10 Feb 2017, 09:23
8 Under a provision of constitution that was never applied, 12 20 Sep 2016, 06:50
8 Under the provisions of the United States Constitution and 17 22 Aug 2016, 12:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by