GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 27 Jan 2020, 03:47

### 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

# V02-37

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 14 Sep 2017
Posts: 3

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2017, 03:07
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.
Manager
Joined: 23 Jan 2017
Posts: 70

### Show Tags

27 Oct 2017, 10:32
I am still not sure if I understood why A is wrong and B is right.

A - She verbally agreed to pay with the rest of the family. Meaning she and her family together agreed to pay off the cost of her studies. What is wrong here? There are so many families who financially support a student in paying off education cost. It is quite possible that her family only consists of her mom and dad, and it is not abnormal to have a joint account among the three to pay off education cost. I do not see any logical, grammatical or meaning flaw here. Besides, such cases practically happen in real life.

B - She agreed with the rest of the family to pay. The sentence implies that the agreement (to pay by herself) was with the rest of the family. Why exactly would the outside party who is making the remark "Our understanding was that she would continue to cover the costs of studies...... " would ever care whether she agreed with the rest of her family OR she agreed just by herself to pay? Besides, what exactly is the need to make that agreement "with the rest of her family" when the family has absolutely no role to play in making the payment??? The meaning is not coming out clearly with this option.

1. Why she needs to make the agreement with the rest of her family when family has not role to play in the payment?
2. Why would the outside party who is making the comment "Our understanding was that she would continue to cover the costs of studies...." care whether she agreed just by herself or with the rest of her family to make the payment when the family has no responsibility to pay? Also, the agreement was verbal. So rest of the family were not co-signers or witnesses. The significance of "Rest of the family" is not coming out clearly.
3. What is wrong in option A in the way explained above?
Intern
Joined: 17 Sep 2017
Posts: 33
Location: Italy
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.9

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2017, 05:58
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.
Manager
Status: To infinity and beyond
Joined: 26 Sep 2017
Posts: 240
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V30
GPA: 3.31
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

21 Feb 2018, 08:07
Is not 'which' modifying 'studies' ?
Intern
Joined: 11 Feb 2017
Posts: 3

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2018, 06:14
I think this is a poor-quality question and I don't agree with the explanation. I don't undestand what... "Which" is referring to . The action she agreed to is .. " She would continue to cover the cost" ...
Can "Which" refer to an action. As per the meaning the sentence intends to convey there are no nouns, which .... "which" can refer to.

Experts pls help me understanding with a simpler example.
Intern
Joined: 02 Apr 2018
Posts: 13

### Show Tags

29 Jul 2018, 05:16

"which she agreed to pay"

Then would this be correct? After "agreed" is it necessary to mention the person with whom we have a disagreement??
Intern
Joined: 25 Feb 2018
Posts: 12

### Show Tags

17 Sep 2018, 03:41
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.
Intern
Joined: 28 Jul 2018
Posts: 12
Location: Morocco
Schools: HBS '22
GMAT 1: 580 Q47 V17

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2018, 15:19
That's incorrect, "which" modifies strictly the noun it touches , and otherwise it would be incorrect even if linked with prepositional phrase
Intern
Joined: 28 Jul 2018
Posts: 12
Location: Morocco
Schools: HBS '22
GMAT 1: 580 Q47 V17

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2018, 15:22
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. the noun "which" should modify "the costs" and in the sentence it incorrectly modifies " studies"
Even if linked with a prepositional phrase, "which' only modifies the noun it touches !
Intern
Joined: 05 Sep 2018
Posts: 9

### Show Tags

13 Jan 2019, 05:07
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2019
Posts: 96
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

23 Apr 2019, 08:03
Bunuel wrote:
Official Solution:

Our understanding was that she would continue to cover the costs of studies, which she verbally agreed to pay with the rest of the family.

A. which she verbally agreed to pay with the rest of the family.
B. which she agreed verbally with the rest of the family to pay.
C. of which she agreed verbally with the rest of the family to pay.
D. both of which she verbally agreed to pay with the rest of the family.
E. both of which she agreed to pay with the rest of the family verbally.

This sentence requires the correct placement of the adverb verbally, indicating the way in which the agreement was made, and the correct use of phrases indicating with whom (the rest of the family) the agreement was made.
1. The phrase with the rest of the family is misplaced, making it sound as if the subject of the sentence and the rest of the family were planning to pay the fees together.
2. The adverb verbally comes immediately after the verb agreed, indicating their correlation, and the placement of the phrase with the rest of the family makes it clear that the agreement was between the two parties.
3. The word of is unnecessary and confusing.
4. The phrase with the rest of the family is misplaced, making it sound as if the subject of the sentence and the family were planning to pay the fees together; also the word both is unnecessary and confusing.
5. Verbally is misplaced, making it sound as if the promised payments will be made by speaking.

I understood exactly how you have put it here and chose A. Because I felt, although B sounded right, it was altering the meaning of the sentence. I know B makes more sense as a situation created with the first part of the sentence, but you know, you can never assume..
_________________
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity!"
Intern
Joined: 10 Jun 2017
Posts: 12
Location: India
Schools: Sloan '22
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.82

### Show Tags

11 May 2019, 03:26
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.
Intern
Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Posts: 11

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2019, 00:06
What is the point in using to pay again at the end? The first part of the sentence already clearly says that she agreed to continue to cover the costs.

Also how to identify the right intended meaning? Option A also gives one logical possibility, she might have agreed to pay together with her family!
Re: V02-37   [#permalink] 03 Jun 2019, 00:06

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 33 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# V02-37

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel