It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 00:49

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

V07-10

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

Hide Tags

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42356

Kudos [?]: 133182 [1], given: 12438

V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Sep 2014, 02:28
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

34% (01:08) correct 66% (01:36) wrong based on 143 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
B. the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
C. the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. 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
E. the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowed companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

New to the Math Forum?
Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread | All You Need for Quant | PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!!

Resources:
GMAT Math Book | Triangles | Polygons | Coordinate Geometry | Factorials | Circles | Number Theory | Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets | PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders | GMAT Prep Software Analysis | SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS) | Tricky questions from previous years.

Collection of Questions:
PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat

DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.


What are GMAT Club Tests?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics


Last edited by souvik101990 on 23 Jul 2015, 10:03, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 133182 [1], given: 12438

Expert Post
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 42356

Kudos [?]: 133182 [0], given: 12438

Re V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Sep 2014, 02:28
Official Solution:

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
B. the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
C. the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. 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
E. the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowed companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling


A) passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling –- The proliferation by itself can not lead to the passing of the act. There must be somebody to pass the act is missing. ‘Led to’ needs either a noun or a noun phrase or a gerund to follow it. ‘Passing the act; is not a gerund; ‘Passing of’ the act is a gerund.

B) the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell - which modifies 1999; it should modify the act.

C) the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling ----- correct modification of which. Right answer.

D) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows the companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell —---what does it refer to; the subject proliferation or the act?

E) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell ----- and allowed companies is wrong in the context. The structure wrongly implies that the proliferation allowed companies to seek up to\)100000 in damages .


Answer: C
_________________

New to the Math Forum?
Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread | All You Need for Quant | PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!!

Resources:
GMAT Math Book | Triangles | Polygons | Coordinate Geometry | Factorials | Circles | Number Theory | Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets | PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders | GMAT Prep Software Analysis | SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS) | Tricky questions from previous years.

Collection of Questions:
PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat

DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.


What are GMAT Club Tests?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics

Kudos [?]: 133182 [0], given: 12438

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 25 Feb 2014
Posts: 49

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 12

GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V39
GPA: 3.83
Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2014, 04:22
Bunuel wrote:
Official Solution:

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later

A. passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later
B. the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
C. the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. 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
E. the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling


A) passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling –- The proliferation by itself can not lead to the passing of the act. There must be somebody to pass the act is missing. ‘Led to’ needs either a noun or a noun phrase or a gerund to follow it. ‘Passing the act; is not a gerund; ‘Passing of’ the act is a gerund.

B) the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell - which modifies 1999; it should modify the act.

C) the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling ----- correct modification of which. Right answer.

D) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows the companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell —---what does it refer to; the subject proliferation or the act?

E) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell ----- 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.


Answer: C

Did not understand this at all. Would appreciate a detailed explanation, if possible.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 12

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 591

Kudos [?]: 482 [0], given: 200

Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Mar 2015, 09:53
narrowed to A&C - picked C at the end.

(A) The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later
-->WRONG. The proliferation ....., led to passing....ALLOWING - WHEN using an ING-Modifier after a comma, it must make sense with the subject and the verb of the clause (before the comma) --> The Subject of the clause is the is PROLIFERATION, so it can not allow something Consumer protection act is the OBJECT here and can not be linked to - allowing

Hope this helps, Experts please correct me if I'm wrong.
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

Share some Kudos, if my posts help you. Thank you !

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Kudos [?]: 482 [0], given: 200

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2015
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2015, 06:35
I think this is a poor-quality question and I agree with explanation. There is a typo in the question and first three answers- seed should be changed to seek

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2015
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2015, 06:37
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. The question choices are not the same as those repeated in the explanations

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
MBA Section Director
User avatar
D
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4695

Kudos [?]: 17715 [1], given: 1986

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2015, 10:03
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post

Kudos [?]: 17715 [1], given: 1986

Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1201

Kudos [?]: 897 [0], given: 75

Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Aug 2015, 03:29
Although I agree with the explanation, option C did not seem good in construction.

given sentence

Quote:
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.


option C is
Quote:
the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling


The final sentence if u substitute option C in given sentence is

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling.

sth led to the passage in 1999 of the Act does not sound correct for me.
Also sentence ends with verb selling. Selling what? It does not complete it.
_________________

The only time you can lose is when you give up. Try hard and you will suceed.
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

http://gmatclub.com/forum/rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html
When you post a question Pls. Provide its source & TAG your questions
Avoid posting from unreliable sources.


My posts
http://gmatclub.com/forum/beauty-of-coordinate-geometry-213760.html#p1649924
http://gmatclub.com/forum/calling-all-march-april-gmat-takers-who-want-to-cross-213154.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/possessive-pronouns-200496.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/double-negatives-206717.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-greatest-integer-function-223595.html#p1721773
https://gmatclub.com/forum/improve-reading-habit-233410.html#p1802265

Kudos [?]: 897 [0], given: 75

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2015
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Dec 2015, 10:48
I think this is a poor-quality question and I don't agree with the explanation. answer choice (D) repeated/ illogical

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 7

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 3

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
Reviews Badge
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Mar 2016, 04:21
Bunuel wrote:
Official Solution:

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.
B. the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
C. the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. 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
E. the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling


A) passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling –- The proliferation by itself can not lead to the passing of the act. There must be somebody to pass the act is missing. ‘Led to’ needs either a noun or a noun phrase or a gerund to follow it. ‘Passing the act; is not a gerund; ‘Passing of’ the act is a gerund.

B) the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell - which modifies 1999; it should modify the act.

C) the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to \(100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling ----- correct modification of which. Right answer.

D) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows the companies to seek up to\)100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell —---what does it refer to; the subject proliferation or the act?

E) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell ----- 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.


Answer: C


I marked B as the answer. i am not sure why is it incorrect because if two modifiers modify the same noun, one has to come before the other. Plus, the construction of choice c is really awkward.

Please clarify if i am wrong.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 3

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2014
Posts: 9

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2016, 06:26
OA (D) is incorrect

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

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 11 Jun 2016, 08:23
rpriya wrote:
OA (D) is incorrect


OA is C, not D.

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Nov 2015
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 126

Location: Uruguay
Concentration: General Management
Schools: Goizueta '19 (A)
GMAT 1: 610 Q41 V32
GMAT 2: 620 Q45 V31
GMAT 3: 640 Q46 V32
GPA: 3.97
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jun 2016, 16:00
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

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 126

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

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 29 Jun 2016, 15:28
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


Your query 1:
Here "led to" is used to convey the meaning "resulted in". Proliferation led to (resulted in) the passage of a law is alright - there were were many cybersquatters, therefore the law was passed.

Your query 2:
Check the underlined portion now - it would make sense.

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Nov 2015
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 126

Location: Uruguay
Concentration: General Management
Schools: Goizueta '19 (A)
GMAT 1: 610 Q41 V32
GMAT 2: 620 Q45 V31
GMAT 3: 640 Q46 V32
GPA: 3.97
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2016, 15:34
sayantanc2k wrote:
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


Your query 1:
Here "led to" is used to convey the meaning "resulted in". Proliferation led to (resulted in) the passage of a law is alright - there were were many cybersquatters, therefore the law was passed.

Your query 2:
Check the underlined portion now - it would make sense.


1) Got it
2) Yes!

Thank you.

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 126

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 03 Sep 2015
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2016, 11:00
an -ING after the comma, always modifies the clause before it.
A. Incorrect
B. Incorrect because "Which after the comma modifies the 1999, and also which cannot be used to modify the preceeding clause"
C. Correcy
D. Way to wordy
E. the effect ("charging the cheater") mentioned in the later part of the sentence is because of the Act "Passage of act" not because of the cause "proliferation", as this sentence formation suggests, hence incorrect.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Sep 2015
Posts: 24

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 28

Location: India
Schools: IIMA (I)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.2
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jul 2016, 02:42
there must be some noun after 'those"

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 28

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

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 07 Jul 2016, 12:12
vishnu440 wrote:
there must be some noun after 'those"


I understand your point - "this", "that", "these", and "those" as demonstrative pronouns should have noun following them. However another use of "that" and "those" is to create a new copy of a noun that has already been used in te sentence. In such cases there is no need for a noun to follow, since the pronoun itself replaces the noun.

Here "those" is used to replace "people".

Another example: My books are more interesting than those of yours.

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2016
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 31

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V37
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: V07-10 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jul 2016, 06:29
I think this is a poor-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 31

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

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 18 Jul 2016, 11:38
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 ?

Kudos [?]: 3522 [0], given: 22

Re: V07-10   [#permalink] 18 Jul 2016, 11:38

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 31 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

V07-10

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

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.