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.
May 0510:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
GMAT Inequalities is a high-frequency topic in GMAT Quant, but many students struggle because the concepts behave differently from standard algebra. Understanding the right rules, patterns, and edge cases can significantly improve both speed and accuracy.- May 06
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 3 of our GMAT Ninja Critical Reasoning series, we tackle Discrepancy, Paradox, and Explain an Oddity questions. You know the feeling: the passage gives you two facts that seem completely contradictory.... - May 08
08:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the special YouTube live-stream for selecting the winners of GMAT Club MBA Scholarships sponsored by Juno live. Watch who gets these coveted MBA scholarships offered by GMAT Club and Juno.
16 Sep 2014, 02:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
The pharmaceutical company conceded that its blockbuster drug may have contributed to the recent outbreak of skin rashes experienced by its consumers and having pulled the drug off the market, led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price.
A. having pulled the drug off the market, led to
B. pulled the drug off the market, leading to
C. pulling the drug off the market, leading to
D. pulled the drug off the market, led to
E. pulled the drug off the market, having led to
A. having pulled the drug off the market, led to
B. pulled the drug off the market, leading to
C. pulling the drug off the market, leading to
D. pulled the drug off the market, led to
E. pulled the drug off the market, having led to
16 Sep 2014, 02:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
The pharmaceutical company conceded that its blockbuster drug may have contributed to the recent outbreak of skin rashes experienced by its consumers and having pulled the drug off the market, led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price.
A. having pulled the drug off the market, led to
B. pulled the drug off the market, leading to
C. pulling the drug off the market, leading to
D. pulled the drug off the market, led to
E. pulled the drug off the market, having led to
A. The original sentence is incorrect in its usage of the verbs “having pulled” and “led.” The verbs “conceded” at the beginning of the sentence and “pulled” serve logically parallel functions in the sentence, so they should be parallel in structure. The construction “having pulled” is not parallel in the sentence. Also, the use of “led” after the comma is incorrect, as the comma indicates that “led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price” is not serving as a third item in the list, but as a distinct clause describing the results of the actions of the company. The use of “led” in this sentence incorrectly suggests that the pharmaceutical company itself led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price. It was the concession of the pharmaceutical company and its pulling of the drug, not the pharmaceutical company itself, that led to the drop.
B. CORRECT. In this choice, “pulled” is structurally parallel to “conceded.” Moreover, “leading” correctly begins the verb clause after the comma in and correctly attributes the drop in share price to the pharmaceutical company’s actions.
C. This choice incorrectly uses the gerund “pulling”; the verb should be parallel to “conceded,” as these verbs are used in a logically parallel way in the sentence.
D. This choice incorrectly treats the final verb clause “led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price” as a third item in the list; however, it serves a different function in the sentence. Even if the verb clause is used as the third list, “and” should be used to connect the last list item. The wording in this choice also incorrectly suggests that the pharmaceutical company itself led to a sharp drop in the its share price. It was the concession of the pharmaceutical company, not the company itself that led to the drop.
E. The use of the verb construction “having led” is unjustified in the sentence, and also incorrectly attributes the drop in share price to the pharmaceutical company itself as opposed to the company’s actions.
Answer: B
The pharmaceutical company conceded that its blockbuster drug may have contributed to the recent outbreak of skin rashes experienced by its consumers and having pulled the drug off the market, led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price.
A. having pulled the drug off the market, led to
B. pulled the drug off the market, leading to
C. pulling the drug off the market, leading to
D. pulled the drug off the market, led to
E. pulled the drug off the market, having led to
A. The original sentence is incorrect in its usage of the verbs “having pulled” and “led.” The verbs “conceded” at the beginning of the sentence and “pulled” serve logically parallel functions in the sentence, so they should be parallel in structure. The construction “having pulled” is not parallel in the sentence. Also, the use of “led” after the comma is incorrect, as the comma indicates that “led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price” is not serving as a third item in the list, but as a distinct clause describing the results of the actions of the company. The use of “led” in this sentence incorrectly suggests that the pharmaceutical company itself led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price. It was the concession of the pharmaceutical company and its pulling of the drug, not the pharmaceutical company itself, that led to the drop.
B. CORRECT. In this choice, “pulled” is structurally parallel to “conceded.” Moreover, “leading” correctly begins the verb clause after the comma in and correctly attributes the drop in share price to the pharmaceutical company’s actions.
C. This choice incorrectly uses the gerund “pulling”; the verb should be parallel to “conceded,” as these verbs are used in a logically parallel way in the sentence.
D. This choice incorrectly treats the final verb clause “led to a sharp drop in the company’s share price” as a third item in the list; however, it serves a different function in the sentence. Even if the verb clause is used as the third list, “and” should be used to connect the last list item. The wording in this choice also incorrectly suggests that the pharmaceutical company itself led to a sharp drop in the its share price. It was the concession of the pharmaceutical company, not the company itself that led to the drop.
E. The use of the verb construction “having led” is unjustified in the sentence, and also incorrectly attributes the drop in share price to the pharmaceutical company itself as opposed to the company’s actions.
Answer: B
01 Jun 2017, 00:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
Anyone Explain What is the Error in D
