Join us for MBA Spotlight – The Top 20 MBA Fair      Schedule of Events | Register

 It is currently 06 Jun 2020, 01:15

### 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

# Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 13
GMAT Date: 09-12-2013
Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 02 Jul 2018, 22:06
1
5
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

74% (01:28) correct 26% (01:30) wrong based on 262 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress, the government's argument centered on what many legal experts consider a main-stream interpretation of the Bill of Rights.

A) the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

B) the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

C) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

D) the petitioner's argument, whose case rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress

E) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress

Originally posted by SmokedRing on 30 Aug 2013, 13:37.
Last edited by Bunuel on 02 Jul 2018, 22:06, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 13
GMAT Date: 09-12-2013
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2013, 13:43
Within seconds I narrowed down to C and E.
but I took over two and half minutes debating with myself over the use of ONLY.

I chose the wrong answer E because i thought to show contrast(Sentence starts with Unlike) between 'many legal experts' and Congress, ONLY should modify congress.
* this is similar to OG ques? -- Diabetes, ...., ranks....only yo heart diseases.*
Director
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 670
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2013, 13:50
1
2
SmokedRing wrote:
Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress, the government's argument centered on what many legal experts consider a main-stream interpretation of the Bill of Rights.
A) the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress
B) the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress
C) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress
D) the petitioner's argument, whose case rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress
E) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress

like /unlike ==>always followed by noun or noun phrase.
like/unlike x , y ==>x and y should be parallel.

now in this question Y = the government's argument.
therefore X cant be team of lawyers ..therefore A is wrong.

B) the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress
WRONG.
the petioner,s argument is better than the argument from the petitioner

C)the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress
CORRECT

D) the petitioner's argument, whose case rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress
WRONG.
WHOSE ==>THIS HAS NO REFERENT and ARGUMENT cant be refered as WHOSE.
ONLY PASSED: meaning is wrong...=>it means that bill only passe congres....
rather actual intended meaning is that bill only RECENTLY passed.
so ONLY always modifies the word following IT.

E) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress
WRONG.
ONLY PASSED: meaning is wrong...=>it means that bill only passe congres....
rather actual intended meaning is that bill only RECENTLY passed.
so ONLY always modifies the word following IT.

_________________
When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...

learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment
Manager
Joined: 29 Apr 2013
Posts: 86
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT Date: 11-06-2013
WE: Programming (Telecommunications)
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2013, 10:27
I wasted some seconds in understanding what "recently passed Congress" mean
So by the way what does "recently passed Congress" mean?
Princeton Review Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Posts: 155
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2013, 14:48
The "unlike" in this argument shows that there is a parallelism issue with what two things are "unlike" This is further compounded by the use of a descriptive phrase in between the two unlike things.

It is clear that the government's argument is unlike the petitioner's argument and since government is not underlined, this eliminates A and B for parallel comparison problems.

The next clear error is a pronoun error - the sentence gives you the option of "which" or "whose" whose is appropriate for people, not for arguments therefore D is eliminated for a bad pronoun.

The decision between C and E comes down to the placement of "only" This is a tricky adverb because it is very specific in what it modifies. in C it clearly modifies recently implying that up until recently it had not passed congress.

in E) it modifies passed - which means it only passed Congress (implying that there are other things it could have passed) To preserve the meaning of the sentence you would pick C as the correct answer.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 64317
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2019, 22:48
SmokedRing wrote:
Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress, the government's argument centered on what many legal experts consider a main-stream interpretation of the Bill of Rights.

A) the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

B) the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

C) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress

D) the petitioner's argument, whose case rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress

E) the petitioner's argument, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that recently only passed Congress

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

There are two main issues being tested in this sentence.

(1) When using like or unlike, you must compare like parts (e.g., compare arguments with arguments). The original sentence improperly compares the team of lawyers with the government's argument.

(2) The expression , which modifies the term that is immediately before it. For example, the phrase the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress is incorrect since it was not the petitioner that rested on a questionable interpretation, but rather the argument that rested on a questionable interpretation.

A. the sentence illogically and improperly compares unlike parts (i.e., it compares the team of lawyers with the government's argument)

B. the phrase the argument from the petitioner, which rested on a questionable interpretation of a bill that only recently passed Congress is incorrect since it was not the petitioner that rested on a questionable interpretation, but rather the argument that rested on a questionable interpretation

C. the sentence properly compares like parts (i.e., it compares the petitioner's argument with the government's argument); , which rested on... properly and logically modifies the phrase it follows

D. the phrase whose case rested on is illogical since whose (which should modify a person) is actually modifying an argument

E. the original sentence, which reads a bill that only recently passed Congress, is perniciously changed to a new sentence, which reads a bill that recently only passed Congress; the difference in meaning between a bill that recently only passed Congress (meaning it did not become law) and a bill that only recently passed Congress (meaning it passed Congress a short time ago) is significant
_________________
Re: Unlike the team of lawyers working for the petitioner, whose argument   [#permalink] 26 Nov 2019, 22:48