GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Aug 2018, 19:59

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

V07-10

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 14
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2016, 06:00
B is incorrect but is the reason stated enough?
means there is also a pronoun ambiguity, isn't it?
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2016, 07:06
1
Karanagrawal wrote:
B is incorrect but is the reason stated enough?
means there is also a pronoun ambiguity, isn't it?


Are you referring to "they"? If so, then please note that such usage is not considered ambiguous and accepted in GMAT: If a pronoun that is the subject of a clause has two possible antecedents, one of which is the subject of another clause within the sentence, the pronoun would, by virtue of parallelism, unambiguously refer to the subject antecedent.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Posts: 14
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2016, 07:27
sayantanc2k wrote:
Karanagrawal wrote:
B is incorrect but is the reason stated enough?
means there is also a pronoun ambiguity, isn't it?


Are you referring to "they"? If so, then please note that such usage is not considered ambiguous and accepted in GMAT: If a pronoun that is the subject of a clause has two possible antecedents, one of which is the subject of another clause within the sentence, the pronoun would, by virtue of parallelism, unambiguously refer to the subject antecedent.

is they refers to those??
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2016, 08:06
1
Karanagrawal wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
Karanagrawal wrote:
B is incorrect but is the reason stated enough?
means there is also a pronoun ambiguity, isn't it?


Are you referring to "they"? If so, then please note that such usage is not considered ambiguous and accepted in GMAT: If a pronoun that is the subject of a clause has two possible antecedents, one of which is the subject of another clause within the sentence, the pronoun would, by virtue of parallelism, unambiguously refer to the subject antecedent.

is they refers to those??


Subject "they" of the clause "they will selll...." refers to the subject "who" of the clause " who register domain names...." - "who" in turn refers to "those".
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 2
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Sep 2016, 03:35
I think this is a poor-quality question and I agree with explanation. 1)As per question <test>allowing companies to "seed" up to <text>
Here seed must be seek
2) there no underline for last part of question " them later." but answer choice 1 include that part
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Sep 2016, 10:47
vijayer123 wrote:
I think this is a poor-quality question and I agree with explanation. 1)As per question <test>allowing companies to "seed" up to <text>
Here seed must be seek
2) there no underline for last part of question " them later." but answer choice 1 include that part


Thank you for the observations. Both the typos have been corrected.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 16 Jun 2016
Posts: 29
Concentration: Accounting
GMAT 1: 640 Q51 V24
GMAT 2: 730 Q51 V37
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Nov 2016, 12:46
sayantanc2k wrote:
rpriya wrote:
OA (D) is incorrect


OA is C, not D.


Explanation for Option E: and allowing companies is wrong in the context. If you use ‘and’, a coordinate conjunction, the structure needs a clause with verb. Allowing is not a verb but a present participle.

I thought that here and is being used to connect verb-ed modifier(passed) and verb-ing modifier (allowing). Please explain where I am going wrong.
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Nov 2016, 14:23
sachin0890 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
rpriya wrote:
OA (D) is incorrect


OA is C, not D.


Explanation for Option E: and allowing companies is wrong in the context. If you use ‘and’, a coordinate conjunction, the structure needs a clause with verb. Allowing is not a verb but a present participle.

I thought that here and is being used to connect verb-ed modifier(passed) and verb-ing modifier (allowing). Please explain where I am going wrong.


Your understanding is correct. The option ans its explanation have been modified.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jan 2016
Posts: 8
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GPA: 3.5
Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Mar 2017, 04:36
Option A passing the Anti-Cyber squatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000

In think there is one more error in option A ,Although Allowing ..(Verbi-ing modifier ) is modifying the result of passing the act but allowing need to be agreed with the subject of the previous clause because allowing is not agree with subject The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters(it is not allowing but the act is allowing ) option A is wrong
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 04 Apr 2017
Posts: 18
Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 May 2017, 10:25
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation. Options D has a typo in it. Please correct it.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 17 May 2016
Posts: 15
Location: United States
Schools: AGSM '18
Premium Member
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 01:52
This is how option D is written in Club Test:

the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 10 Sep 2015
Posts: 66
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Human Resources
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
GPA: 4
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2017, 03:24
sayantanc2k wrote:
shashanksagar wrote:
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.


If you could specify what your query is, then we could respond accordingly - why do you think that this question is of poor quality and which part of the explanation is not clear ?


It is well known that which could jump over prepositional phrases and hence the reason given to reject the option B is not sufficient enough.

Experts please clarify if i am wrong.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 367
CAT Tests
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Dec 2017, 05:43
Avigano wrote:
I hope I don't get a similar phrase on test day! I suppose there are a few problems with the construction of the phrase.

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters.. led to the passage it's rather odd that is leeds to the passage, can it lead to a passage? hmm..
Other BIG concern with the answer is the Selling at the end of phrase. Selling what? Selling is ambiguous at the end of the phrase since we do not know what SELLING is referred to. It should be Selling the domains so we are certain of what these people are selling. as far as the phrase puts the selling at the end, the companies could be the ones selling, or being sold


Exactly - is the usage of 'passage'correct here - passage is a noun, not a verb. 'Passing'/ 'passed' usually fits for the movement of a bill. Verbal experts, please request your thoughts
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 493
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2018, 12:32
I think this is a poor-quality question and I agree with explanation. OPTION D REQUIRES EDITING..
the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999,
and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999,
and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell

repetition of and it allows.....to sell
_________________

Give Kudos for correct answer and/or if you like the solution.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 493
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2018, 12:39
asthagupta wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
shashanksagar wrote:
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.


If you could specify what your query is, then we could respond accordingly - why do you think that this question is of poor quality and which part of the explanation is not clear ?


It is well known that which could jump over prepositional phrases and hence the reason given to reject the option B is not sufficient enough.

Experts please clarify if i am wrong.



Rule regarding , which modifier =>

EXCERPT from Ron Purewal-
if you have "which" following "noun1 + preposition + noun2", then "which" can refer to noun1 only if noun2 is grammatically ineligible. otherwise it automatically refers to noun2.

Now you see option C -> ,which clearly modifies correctly.
moreover comparing B vs C - we have= with the sole intent that they will sell {they = people , cybersquatters,???)
VS with the sole intent of selling...
C is clear and concise without ambiguity.

sayantanc2k kindly check whether the above POE is correct for B vs C
_________________

Give Kudos for correct answer and/or if you like the solution.

Re: V07-10 &nbs [#permalink] 19 Feb 2018, 12:39

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 35 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

V07-10

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.