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 0608:30 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 05
10:00 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 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.
11 Nov 2020, 00:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
79% (01:11) correct
21%
(01:34)
wrong
based on 265
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people, which have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
A) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people, which have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
B) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people that have less than six months to live to access medication to accelerate their demise.
C) Rather than waiting to die, the demise of mentally stable people who have less than six months to live can be accelerated by Ore- gon’s right-to-die law who permits them access to medication.
D) Rather than waiting to die, mentally stable people who have less than six months to live are permitted access to medication by Oregon’s right-to-die law to accelerate their demise.
E) Rather then waiting to die, mentally stable people’s demise can be accelerated by Oregon’s right-to-die law, permitting them access to medication provided they have less than six months to live.
Posted from my mobile device
Rather than waiting to die,
--there is something which is preferred over "waiting to die"
Oregon’s right-to-die law
Law is waiting to die
funny!
permits mentally stable people
, which
--, which is going back to mentally stable people...it should be ",who"
have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
A) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people, which have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
--Incorrect as mentioned above
B) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people that have less than six months to live to access medication to accelerate their demise.
--Same error as A (Oregon’s right-to-die law is not waiting to die)
--that for people is incorrect.
C) Rather than waiting to die, the demise of mentally stable people who have less than six months to live can be accelerated by Oregon’s right-to-die law who permits them access to medication.
--demise of mentally stable people is waiting to die
--who for law is incorrect
D) Rather than waiting to die, mentally stable people who have less than six months to live are permitted access to medication by Oregon’s right-to-die law to accelerate their demise.
--Makes sense
--Who were waiting to die? Mentally stable people who have less than 6 months to live
--Relative pronoun who is correctly used for people
E) Rather then waiting to die, mentally stable people’s demise can be accelerated by Oregon’s right-to-die law, permitting them access to medication provided they have less than six months to live.
--mentally stable people’s demise is waiting to die
--no antecedent for them
--permitting is modifying the action "can be accelerated" => the demise can be accelerated by permitting the terminating people access to medication...looks good isn't it? but....provided they have six months to live..here meaning is altered.
IMO D
--there is something which is preferred over "waiting to die"
Oregon’s right-to-die law
Law is waiting to die
funny!permits mentally stable people
, which
--, which is going back to mentally stable people...it should be ",who"
have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
A) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people, which have less than six months to live, access to medication to accelerate their demise.
--Incorrect as mentioned above
B) Rather than waiting to die, Oregon’s right-to-die law permits mentally stable people that have less than six months to live to access medication to accelerate their demise.
--Same error as A (Oregon’s right-to-die law is not waiting to die)
--that for people is incorrect.
C) Rather than waiting to die, the demise of mentally stable people who have less than six months to live can be accelerated by Oregon’s right-to-die law who permits them access to medication.
--demise of mentally stable people is waiting to die
--who for law is incorrect
D) Rather than waiting to die, mentally stable people who have less than six months to live are permitted access to medication by Oregon’s right-to-die law to accelerate their demise.
--Makes sense
--Who were waiting to die? Mentally stable people who have less than 6 months to live
--Relative pronoun who is correctly used for people
E) Rather then waiting to die, mentally stable people’s demise can be accelerated by Oregon’s right-to-die law, permitting them access to medication provided they have less than six months to live.
--mentally stable people’s demise is waiting to die
--no antecedent for them
--permitting is modifying the action "can be accelerated" => the demise can be accelerated by permitting the terminating people access to medication...looks good isn't it? but....provided they have six months to live
..here meaning is altered.IMO D
General Discussion
11 Nov 2020, 01:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
THE PROMPT
• modifiers
GMAC really likes to test introductory modifiers
Right after we read the intro phrase, [r]ather than waiting to die, we should be reading about whomever or whatever that phrase refers to.
Noun modifiers should "touch" the nouns that they describe.
• relative pronouns: which, that, who
→ when we refer to things, we always use which or that and never use who. Who is used to refer to people.
→ when we refer to people, we almost always use who.
On rare occasions, a group of people, such as a "choir" or "battalion," can be described with which or that.
Oregon's right-to-die law is not waiting to die. Terminally ill people who have less than six months to live are waiting to die.
• we use who to refer to people, not which (or that)
ELIMINATE A
• we use who to refer to people, not that (that is used to refer to things)
ELIMINATE B
• we use that to refer to a law (a thing), not who; who is used only to refer to people
ELIMINATE C
• the sentence is succinct (and a bit macabre)
KEEP
• awkward placement: provided [that] they have less than six months to live should be closer to the mentally stable people,
Compare to option D, in which placing the modifiers and noun close together makes it easy to understand meaning.
• THEM - is not enough reason to eliminate this answer
→ many of you have been taught that a subject (they) or object (them) pronoun cannot refer to a possessive antecedent
This "rule" is often referred to as the "possessive poison" rule
→ good sources get this rule wrong
→ you should believe the official questions, in which possessive poison is not an ironclad rule
I wrote a post about "possessive poison," in which I explain the concept and demonstrate that the rule is far from strong: I include a few official SC questions in which a pronoun is allowed to refer to a possessive antecedent. There are quite a few more such official questions.
You can find that post by clicking here.
[If this last bullet point confused you, do not worry. Read the post I linked. If you are still confused, let the issue go and read for 30 minutes.]
ELIMINATE E
Option D is the answer.
COMMENTS
DinoPen , good to "see" you again. It's been awhile.
As I mentioned in my other OE, electricity and internet have been spotty for a couple of days here, so I may sound abrupt (and I don't mean to do so).
Most of these answers are very good.
AntrikshR , I am bumping your post to Best Community Reply.
Be safe, everyone.
Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1)
THE PROMPT
Quote:
Issues tested?
• modifiers
GMAC really likes to test introductory modifiers
Right after we read the intro phrase, [r]ather than waiting to die, we should be reading about whomever or whatever that phrase refers to.
Noun modifiers should "touch" the nouns that they describe.
• relative pronouns: which, that, who
→ when we refer to things, we always use which or that and never use who. Who is used to refer to people.
→ when we refer to people, we almost always use who.
On rare occasions, a group of people, such as a "choir" or "battalion," can be described with which or that.
Quote:
• Modifier misplacement
Oregon's right-to-die law is not waiting to die. Terminally ill people who have less than six months to live are waiting to die.
• we use who to refer to people, not which (or that)
ELIMINATE A
Quote:
• Modifier error: Oregon's law is not waiting to die
• we use who to refer to people, not that (that is used to refer to things)
ELIMINATE B
Quote:
• modifier error: the demise (i.e. passing) is not waiting to die
• we use that to refer to a law (a thing), not who; who is used only to refer to people
ELIMINATE C
Quote:
• correct placement: the noun mentally stable people correctly follows the phrase rather than waiting to die
• the sentence is succinct (and a bit macabre)
KEEP
Quote:
• modifier error: the demise (i.e. passing) is not waiting to die
• awkward placement: provided [that] they have less than six months to live should be closer to the mentally stable people,
Compare to option D, in which placing the modifiers and noun close together makes it easy to understand meaning.
• THEM - is not enough reason to eliminate this answer
→ many of you have been taught that a subject (they) or object (them) pronoun cannot refer to a possessive antecedent
This "rule" is often referred to as the "possessive poison" rule
→ good sources get this rule wrong
→ you should believe the official questions, in which possessive poison is not an ironclad rule
I wrote a post about "possessive poison," in which I explain the concept and demonstrate that the rule is far from strong: I include a few official SC questions in which a pronoun is allowed to refer to a possessive antecedent. There are quite a few more such official questions.
You can find that post by clicking here.
[If this last bullet point confused you, do not worry. Read the post I linked. If you are still confused, let the issue go and read for 30 minutes.]
ELIMINATE E
Option D is the answer.
COMMENTS
DinoPen , good to "see" you again. It's been awhile.
As I mentioned in my other OE, electricity and internet have been spotty for a couple of days here, so I may sound abrupt (and I don't mean to do so).
Most of these answers are very good.
AntrikshR , I am bumping your post to Best Community Reply.
Be safe, everyone.
