Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
lemonmelon
Current Student
Joined: 06 Mar 2017
Last visit: 27 Jan 2022
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 4
Location: India
Schools: Johnson '24 (A$)
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V40
Products:
12 Aug 2020, 22:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
I am familiar with the concept that statements of factual nature, or statements that express just a general state-of-being, are typically (most of the time) written in simple present tense. However, is this an iron-clad rule or are there any exceptions?
I came across a VeritasPrep question in which the question prompt compares philosophies of two people in the past. Two possible constructions:
(i) "philosophy of person A IS different from that of B" --> rationale that philosophies still exist, or
(ii) "philosophy of person A WAS different from that of B" --> one could argue that philosophies were introduced in the past
I am inclined towards option (i), but curious if (ii) could be correct in other similar scenarios?
Thanks,
I came across a VeritasPrep question in which the question prompt compares philosophies of two people in the past. Two possible constructions:
(i) "philosophy of person A IS different from that of B" --> rationale that philosophies still exist, or
(ii) "philosophy of person A WAS different from that of B" --> one could argue that philosophies were introduced in the past
I am inclined towards option (i), but curious if (ii) could be correct in other similar scenarios?
Thanks,
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
507 posts
361 posts
