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 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
19 Feb 2021, 00:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
70% (02:13) correct
30%
(02:12)
wrong
based on 341
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people across the length and breadth of the country, most of whom are children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
A) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people across the length and breadth of the country, most of whom are children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
B) Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances by a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
C) The maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, Panacea, using a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, which has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
D) In a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased across the length and breadth of the country, a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to mostly treat epilepsy in people and children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances.
E) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
19 Feb 2021, 00:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
THE PROMPT
• Meaning?
In a move that has been widely criticized, the judge who oversees the bankruptcy proceedings the drug company Panacea has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company's finances. Panacea makes drugs that are widely used mostly in children to treat epilepsy.
• Issues?
→ Above all, meaning and logic.
A few of these options are absurd.
→ IDIOM (GMAC tests this one): the correct idiom is barred from, not barred to
THE OPTIONS
• barred to is unidiomatic
• a modifier is a bit far from its noun
→ most of whom are children arguably refers to people because
(1) whom is used for people, and
(2) people is followed by a long prepositional phrase that most of whom can "reach back over" to get to its noun.
On the other hand, the placement of most of whom are children after country strains the sentence.
→ If you did not know that barred to is unidiomatic, you should have kept (A) and looked for a better answer.
The modifier is not wrong, but neither is it effectively placed.
ELIMINATE A
→ The drug company did not bar lawyers for creditor firms from doing anything, let alone from accessing Panacea's finances.
→ The sentence also suggests that the company's finances are being accessed by a judge.
ELIMINATE B
→The company did not use the judge to bar lawyers from accessing the company's finances.
• barred to is not idiomatic
• which has no antecedent
→ which cannot refer to a verb or an entire clause
→ what has been criticized? A ruling. But that noun never shows up in this sentence. The pronoun which lacks an antecedent.
ELIMINATE C
→ people AND children? No. Children are people.
• mostly is ambiguous and confusing
→ do the drugs "mostly" treat epilepsy but also treat some other condition?
→ do the drugs "mostly" treat epilepsy but do not do so fully, so that other drugs are needed?
→ do not worry that mostly splits the infinitive.
As of now, split infinitives are not tested and not a reason to eliminate an answer. Ever.
Although you will not be tested on split infinitives, GMAT SC writers do not use them.
I have never seen a correct answer to an official question that includes a split infinitive.
In other words, split infinitives are a non-issue. You won't see them.
• strange placement of the modifier across the length and breadth of the country
→ this placement, though different from that in other options and especially from that in option A, does not constitute error because option A does not determine meaning.
→ this placement simply lets us know that the modifier is not very important
ELIMINATE D
• mostly children correctly modifies people
• barred is idiomatically paired with from
• the sentence is logical and its meaning is clear
• if you were not aware of the idiom problem in option A, you could compare options A and E. Option E wins: mostly children is right next to people, a placement that is superior to the construction in option A.
The answer is E.
COMMENTS
Almost all of these answers are excellent, despite a few missteps in some.
I am impressed.
It is not easy to explain errors in long sentences that don't lend themselves easily to clean splits.
Those who explained get kudos. Nicely done!
Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1)
THE PROMPT
Quote:
• Tip: fully underlined long sentences typically test you on (1) modifiers, (2) pronouns, and/or (3) parallelism
• Meaning?
In a move that has been widely criticized, the judge who oversees the bankruptcy proceedings the drug company Panacea has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company's finances. Panacea makes drugs that are widely used mostly in children to treat epilepsy.
• Issues?
→ Above all, meaning and logic.
A few of these options are absurd.
→ IDIOM (GMAC tests this one): the correct idiom is barred from, not barred to
THE OPTIONS
Quote:
• barred to is unidiomatic
• a modifier is a bit far from its noun
→ most of whom are children arguably refers to people because
(1) whom is used for people, and
(2) people is followed by a long prepositional phrase that most of whom can "reach back over" to get to its noun.
On the other hand, the placement of most of whom are children after country strains the sentence.
→ If you did not know that barred to is unidiomatic, you should have kept (A) and looked for a better answer.
The modifier is not wrong, but neither is it effectively placed.
ELIMINATE A
Quote:
• Absurd
→ The drug company did not bar lawyers for creditor firms from doing anything, let alone from accessing Panacea's finances.
→ The sentence also suggests that the company's finances are being accessed by a judge.
ELIMINATE B
Quote:
• Absurd
→The company did not use the judge to bar lawyers from accessing the company's finances.
• barred to is not idiomatic
• which has no antecedent
→ which cannot refer to a verb or an entire clause
→ what has been criticized? A ruling. But that noun never shows up in this sentence. The pronoun which lacks an antecedent.
ELIMINATE C
Quote:
• Absurd
→ people AND children? No. Children are people.
• mostly is ambiguous and confusing
→ do the drugs "mostly" treat epilepsy but also treat some other condition?
→ do the drugs "mostly" treat epilepsy but do not do so fully, so that other drugs are needed?
→ do not worry that mostly splits the infinitive.
As of now, split infinitives are not tested and not a reason to eliminate an answer. Ever.
Although you will not be tested on split infinitives, GMAT SC writers do not use them.
I have never seen a correct answer to an official question that includes a split infinitive.
In other words, split infinitives are a non-issue. You won't see them.
• strange placement of the modifier across the length and breadth of the country
→ this placement, though different from that in other options and especially from that in option A, does not constitute error because option A does not determine meaning.
→ this placement simply lets us know that the modifier is not very important
ELIMINATE D
Quote:
• I do not see any errors.
• mostly children correctly modifies people
• barred is idiomatically paired with from
• the sentence is logical and its meaning is clear
• if you were not aware of the idiom problem in option A, you could compare options A and E. Option E wins: mostly children is right next to people, a placement that is superior to the construction in option A.
The answer is E.
COMMENTS
Almost all of these answers are excellent, despite a few missteps in some.
I am impressed.
It is not easy to explain errors in long sentences that don't lend themselves easily to clean splits.
Those who explained get kudos. Nicely done!
19 Feb 2021, 02:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people across the length and breadth of the country, most of whom are children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
Meaning:
->A judge who is overseeing the bankruptcy case of a company....has barred lawyers..from accessing the company's finances. The action of the judge has been criticized.
Error:
-> barred x to y is not the correct idiom. We should use barred/prohibit x from y in this case.
-> 'most of whom are children' is a misplaced modifier. it should be close to people.
POE:
A) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people across the length and breadth of the country, most of whom are children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased
-> Stated above
B) Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances by a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
-> Meaning changed: Panacea...has barred lawyers from accessing by a judge. (It is a judge who has barred x from y.)
C) The maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, Panacea, using a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, which has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
->Meaning changed:The maker of drugs ...has barred lawyers to access by a judge.
->Meaning changed: the company’s finances, which has been widely criticized. Actually the action of a judge has been criticized.
-> Idiom error: barred x to y is not correct. barred/prohibit x from y is the correct one.
D) In a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased across the length and breadth of the country, a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to mostly treat epilepsy in people and children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances.
-> Sequence of events are broken. Firstly, the judge has done something. The action has resulted in a wide criticism.
-> Modifier error: mostly treat
E) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
Meaning:
->A judge who is overseeing the bankruptcy case of a company....has barred lawyers..from accessing the company's finances. The action of the judge has been criticized.
Error:
-> barred x to y is not the correct idiom. We should use barred/prohibit x from y in this case.
-> 'most of whom are children' is a misplaced modifier. it should be close to people.
POE:
A) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people across the length and breadth of the country, most of whom are children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased
-> Stated above
B) Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances by a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
-> Meaning changed: Panacea...has barred lawyers from accessing by a judge. (It is a judge who has barred x from y.)
C) The maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, Panacea, using a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings, has barred lawyers for creditor firms to access the company’s finances, which has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
->Meaning changed:The maker of drugs ...has barred lawyers to access by a judge.
->Meaning changed: the company’s finances, which has been widely criticized. Actually the action of a judge has been criticized.
-> Idiom error: barred x to y is not correct. barred/prohibit x from y is the correct one.
D) In a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased across the length and breadth of the country, a judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to mostly treat epilepsy in people and children, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances.
-> Sequence of events are broken. Firstly, the judge has done something. The action has resulted in a wide criticism.
-> Modifier error: mostly treat
E) A judge overseeing the bankruptcy proceedings of Panacea, the maker of drugs used to treat epilepsy in people, mostly children, across the length and breadth of the country, has barred lawyers for creditor firms from accessing the company’s finances, a move that has been widely criticized as unfair and biased.
