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

 It is currently 24 May 2019, 08:09

### 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

# V11-10

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4272
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2015, 10:10
3
5
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

66% (01:13) correct 34% (01:20) wrong based on 73 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The Chairman of the company declared that neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.

A. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or
B. neither the company nor its subsidiaries is involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company
C. either the company or its subsidiaries is not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company or
D. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company nor
E. either the company or its subsidiaries are not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company nor

_________________
Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4272
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2015, 10:10
Official Solution:

The Chairman of the company declared that neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.

A. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or
B. neither the company nor its subsidiaries is involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company
C. either the company or its subsidiaries is not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company or
D. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company nor
E. either the company or its subsidiaries are not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company nor

(A) Correct. If in neither…..nor….. structure, the subjects have different numbers (one singular and other plural), the verb agrees in number with the nearest subject. Hence neither the company nor its subsidiaries are is correct.

2. The Chairman wants to declare 3 things:

The company is NOT involved in any labour dispute.

AND

Its subsidiaries are NOT involved in any labour dispute.

AND

Any such dispute is NOT threatened to the knowledge of company or its subsidiaries.

Noting that neither A nor B nor C structure implies not A and not B and not C, the correct way joining the 3 parts above is by neither…nor…nor… structure.

3. The phrase to the knowledge of the company nor its subsidiaries is incorrect.

Only option A correctly presents all the above issues above.

_________________
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Posts: 10

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2016, 13:47
WHY IS D WRONG?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2873
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2016, 06:40
2
manchitkapoor wrote:
WHY IS D WRONG?

In option D "nor" at the end of the unerlined portion is wrong. It is wrong to say:

To the knowledge of the company NOR its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.

Correct is:

To the knowledge of the company OR its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.
Intern
Joined: 06 May 2016
Posts: 8

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2016, 19:53
I got the question right, but I am not sure about the usage of second "nor". Can someone help clarify?

Thanks!
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2873
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2016, 06:31
I got the question right, but I am not sure about the usage of second "nor". Can someone help clarify?

Thanks!

Yes, it is alright - "nor" can be used without "neither" to add a clause to a negative sentence. Example:
I have not heard from him, nor have I heard from his parents.
Intern
Joined: 03 Apr 2015
Posts: 1

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2017, 05:37
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.
Intern
Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Posts: 10

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2017, 13:07
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. The Chairman of the company declared that neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.

Not sure if the question is correction. What is the subject of "is any such dispute threatened"
Intern
Joined: 10 Jun 2016
Posts: 12

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2017, 08:40
sayantanc2k wrote:
I got the question right, but I am not sure about the usage of second "nor". Can someone help clarify?

Thanks!

Yes, it is alright - "nor" can be used without "neither" to add a clause to a negative sentence. Example:
I have not heard from him, nor have I heard from his parents.

Hi, expert.

I still have a query about the usage of "nor".
as in your example: "I have not heard from him, nor have I heard from his parents." Can I change it to “I have not heard from him, nor I have heard from his parents.”? Or would that be wrong? If that is wrong, could you explain why is it wrong? As I see the same structure in the original sentence"nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.", can I change the sentence to "Nor any such dispute is threatened to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries"?

What's more, about the original question. I am not very sure I understand the meaning of the sentence.
What does that mean in the explanation: "Any such dispute is NOT threatened to the knowledge of company or its subsidiaries."
Does that mean: such dispute is not threatened by known from the company or its subsidiaries? It does not make much sense to me.

Thank you very much!

Summer.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2873
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2017, 11:25
summer127 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
I got the question right, but I am not sure about the usage of second "nor". Can someone help clarify?

Thanks!

Yes, it is alright - "nor" can be used without "neither" to add a clause to a negative sentence. Example:
I have not heard from him, nor have I heard from his parents.

Hi, expert.

I still have a query about the usage of "nor".
as in your example: "I have not heard from him, nor have I heard from his parents." Can I change it to “I have not heard from him, nor I have heard from his parents.”? Or would that be wrong? If that is wrong, could you explain why is it wrong? As I see the same structure in the original sentence"nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.", can I change the sentence to "Nor any such dispute is threatened to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries"?

What's more, about the original question. I am not very sure I understand the meaning of the sentence.
What does that mean in the explanation: "Any such dispute is NOT threatened to the knowledge of company or its subsidiaries."
Does that mean: such dispute is not threatened by known from the company or its subsidiaries? It does not make much sense to me.

Thank you very much!

Summer.

1. Reversing the order of verb and subject does not make the sentence wrong. So both the alternatives you mentioned are correct.

2. Consider the sentence:
To my knowledge, he is a hard-working person.
The above sentence implies that As per my knowledge (OR according to what I know OR as far as I know), he is a hard-working person.
The part you mentioned means that as far as the company or its subsidiaries know, no such dispute is threatened.
Intern
Joined: 20 Jun 2017
Posts: 32
GMAT 1: 580 Q36 V32
GMAT 2: 660 Q39 V41
GRE 1: Q159 V160

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2018, 21:22
1
souvik101990 wrote:
Official Solution:

The Chairman of the company declared that neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened.

A. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or
B. neither the company nor its subsidiaries is involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company
C. either the company or its subsidiaries is not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company or
D. neither the company nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company nor
E. either the company or its subsidiaries are not involved in any labour dispute or, to the knowledge of the company nor

(A) Correct. If in neither…..nor….. structure, the subjects have different numbers (one singular and other plural), the verb agrees in number with the nearest subject. Hence neither the company nor its subsidiaries are is correct.

2. The Chairman wants to declare 3 things:

The company is NOT involved in any labour dispute.

AND

Its subsidiaries are NOT involved in any labour dispute.

AND

Any such dispute is NOT threatened to the knowledge of company or its subsidiaries.

Noting that neither A nor B nor C structure implies not A and not B and not C, the correct way joining the 3 parts above is by neither…nor…nor… structure.

3. The phrase to the knowledge of the company nor its subsidiaries is incorrect.

Only option A correctly presents all the above issues above.

I want clarification. Is neither ..nor..nor the correct method, if so, D should be correct
Intern
Joined: 10 Sep 2013
Posts: 32
Location: India
GPA: 4

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2019, 06:14
daagh egmat sayantanc2k

Shouldnt it be " The Chairman of the company declared that neither the company is nor its subsidiaries are involved in any labour dispute nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened. " (I have added is after "neither the company")

Besides, I do not understand the second part of the sentence. What does it mean by "nor, to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries, is any such dispute threatened."

What is parallel here?
Neither the company(noun)
Nor its subsidiaries(noun)
Nor to the knowledge of the company or its subsidiaries (Preposition)

Is the parallelism valid?
V11-10   [#permalink] 19 Feb 2019, 06:14
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# V11-10

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel

 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®.