It is currently 12 Sep 2026, 12:28

Toolkit

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Sep 13
GMAT 615 to 715 in Just 15 Days! Riya’s 100-pt Improvement Strategy
12:30 AM EDT
-
01:30 AM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Sep 13
From ‘GMAT Is Not for Me’ to a 695— Beating Her Target by 50 Points
01:30 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.
Sep 15
Live Online Class with Top GMAT Expert Rich Zwelling
07:00 PM EDT
-
09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 18
Free full-length test!
08:00 PM PDT
-
09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 21
Live Online Bootcamp Class with Top GMAT Expert Chris Peckover
07:00 PM EDT
-
10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does

Bunuel

Math Expert

Joined: 02 Sep 2009

Last visit: 12 Sep 2026

Posts: 113,479

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 113,479

08 Mar 2021, 06:00

00:00

Start Timer

Pause Timer

Resume Timer

Show Answer

Hide

Show

History

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

39% (01:36) correct

61% (01:44) wrong

based on 815 sessions

History

Date

Time

Result

Not Attempted Yet

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship.

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship.

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer.

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship.

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer.

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

_________________

New to the GMAT Club?

Question Bank

Bunuel's Signature Collection

Reading Comprehension

Ultimate Quant Guide

All You Need for Quant

Quantitative

Verbal

Signature Read More

Kudos

Bookmarks

Most Helpful Reply

Bunuel

Math Expert

Joined: 02 Sep 2009

Last visit: 12 Sep 2026

Posts: 113,479

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 113,479

16 Mar 2021, 01:15

Bunuel

Official Explanation

This argument says that two things stand in Melinda’s way—performing poorly on the LSAT and not getting a scholarship. That is, if Melinda does well on the LSAT and gets a scholarship, then she can become a lawyer.

Since Melinda is a lawyer in choice (A), she must have overcome the two obstacles—the LSAT and the scholarship. Hence (A) is valid. This eliminates (A). Next, (B) essentially expresses the same thought as (A). This eliminates (B). Next, (C) says that Melinda didn’t meet one of the two criteria, so she won’t become a lawyer. Hence (C) is valid. This eliminates (C). You should notice that the conclusion in (D) is too strong. Melinda may do well on the LSAT and get a scholarship yet decide not to become a lawyer. The answer, therefore, is (D).

_________________

New to the GMAT Club?

Question Bank

Bunuel's Signature Collection

Reading Comprehension

Ultimate Quant Guide

All You Need for Quant

Quantitative

Verbal

Signature Read More

Kudos

Bookmarks

General Discussion

HoneyLemon

Stern School Moderator

Joined: 26 May 2020

Last visit: 02 Oct 2023

Posts: 627

Status:Spirited

Concentration: General Management, Technology

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

WE:Analyst (Computer Software)

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

Posts: 627

Updated on: 15 Mar 2021, 12:56

Originally posted by HoneyLemon on 13 Mar 2021, 04:05.
Last edited by HoneyLemon on 15 Mar 2021, 12:56, edited 2 times in total.

Ans is D
Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

Sufficient Condition ------ >>> Necessary Condition

Melinda can become a lawyer --- > Unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.
A --> B

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship.
A --> B .. Can be inferred

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship.
A --> B .. Can be inferred

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer.
B- --> A- .. Can be inferred

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship.
A- --> B .. Cannot be inferred
(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer.
B- --> A- .. Can be inferred

Kudos

Bookmarks

winterschool

Verbal Chat Moderator

Joined: 20 Mar 2018

Last visit: 17 Aug 2026

Posts: 1,890

13 Mar 2021, 04:18

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship. Incorrect

it may be possible

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship. Correct

it cant be possible, if Melinda did well on the LSAT or gotten a scholarship than she can admit to lawyer

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible, if any point in the argument happen than she will not become a lawyer

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship. Incorrect

possible

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible

_________________

For verbal chat and questions
Join Here

Verbal Question of the Day

Signature Read More

Kudos

Bookmarks

HoneyLemon

Stern School Moderator

Joined: 26 May 2020

Last visit: 02 Oct 2023

Posts: 627

Status:Spirited

Concentration: General Management, Technology

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

WE:Analyst (Computer Software)

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

Posts: 627

13 Mar 2021, 05:02

winterschool

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship. Incorrect

it may be possible

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship. Correct

it cant be possible, if Melinda did well on the LSAT or gotten a scholarship than she can admit to lawyer

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible, if any point in the argument happen than she will not become a lawyer

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship. Incorrect

possible

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible

winterschool

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship

that means
Melinda can not become a lawyer if (she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship )

i.e
Melinda will become a lawyer if (she does not poorly on the LSAT and does get a scholarship )

So in this logic
Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship.
We can infer this .. isn't it ?
May you please revert on the above logic ...

Kudos

Bookmarks

winterschool

Verbal Chat Moderator

Joined: 20 Mar 2018

Last visit: 17 Aug 2026

Posts: 1,890

13 Mar 2021, 22:19

HoneyLemon

winterschool

Melinda can become a lawyer unless she does poorly on the LSAT or does not get a scholarship.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship. Incorrect

it may be possible

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship. Correct

it cant be possible, if Melinda did well on the LSAT or gotten a scholarship than she can admit to lawyer

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible, if any point in the argument happen than she will not become a lawyer

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship. Incorrect

possible

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer. Incorrect

possible

HoneyLemon

I'm not sure about B. There is or present between two option. if she does any one, she will become lawyer.
so, both cant be needed but both can be happen. Based on this I choose B.
Between A & B any one can be right answer

_________________

For verbal chat and questions
Join Here

Verbal Question of the Day

Signature Read More

Kudos

Bookmarks

PTibrewal

Joined: 19 Dec 2020

Last visit: 24 Apr 2022

Posts: 4

Location: India

Posts: 4

15 Mar 2021, 10:39

Hi Brunnel

Can you please help me understand why A is not a correct answer and D is correct.

Kudos

Bookmarks

HoneyLemon

Stern School Moderator

Joined: 26 May 2020

Last visit: 02 Oct 2023

Posts: 627

Status:Spirited

Concentration: General Management, Technology

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

WE:Analyst (Computer Software)

Schools: Stern '23 LBS '23 Said '23 IIMB EPGP'22 INSEAD Jan'23 intake

Posts: 627

15 Mar 2021, 13:01

HoneyLemon

Clear concepts of conditional reasoning with multiple necessary conditions embodied

Kudos

Bookmarks

ravigupta2912

Current Student

Joined: 26 May 2019

Last visit: 16 Feb 2025

Posts: 716

Location: India

Schools: Said '23 IESE '24 LBS '24 (D) ISB '23 (WA) INSEAD Aug 22 intake (D) Judge '23 (D)

GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34 Verified score

GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40 Verified score

GPA: 2.58

WE:Consulting (Consulting)

Products:

Schools: Said '23 IESE '24 LBS '24 (D) ISB '23 (WA) INSEAD Aug 22 intake (D) Judge '23 (D)

GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40 Verified score

Posts: 716

20 Mar 2021, 05:50

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship. -- Incorrect. She only needs to satisfy one of the conditions to become a lawyer i.e. only one of the condition need not occur. In this choice, "both.. and" is used, which is contrary to the passage stem.

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship. -- Incorrect. Same as A.

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer. -- Incorrect. If she gets a scholarship, she can become a lawyer. She doesn't become a lawyer if either does not happen (poor performance on gmat OR no scholarship). In this case, she can still have scholarship and be a lawyer.

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship. -- Yes, true. "or" is the key word here.

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer. -- Eliminate. She need not satisfy both the conditions to be a lawyer.

Kudos

Bookmarks

Green2k1

Joined: 06 Jun 2019

Last visit: 19 Aug 2024

Posts: 102

Location: India

Concentration: International Business, Technology

Posts: 102

23 Mar 2021, 09:41

The question is based on the necessary vs sufficient condition:

Necessary condition stated in the argument: does well the LSAT and get a scholarship, However the sufficient condition is not given.

Which one of the following statements cannot be validly drawn from the above statements?

(A) Melinda is lawyer. So she must have both done well on the LSAT and gotten a scholarship.
- As she is lawyer - therefore, all the conditions must have been full filled

(B) Melinda is a lawyer and she did well on the LSAT. So she must have gotten a scholarship.
- Same as A

(C) Melinda did poorly on the LSAT. So she will not become a lawyer.
- Here, she did not able to meet the necessary condition to become a lawyer. So she will not become lawyer

(D) If Melinda does not become a lawyer, then she did poorly on the LSAT or could not get a scholarship.
- Consider the case she did well on LSAT and also got Scholarship, but did not join the college
- The argument statement uses the word "CAN" - it is just showing the capability

(E) If Melinda does poorly on the LSAT and does not get a scholarship, then she will not become a lawyer.
- Same as C

Kudos

Bookmarks

srik410

Joined: 07 Oct 2024

Last visit: 18 Feb 2026

Posts: 84

Location: India

Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship

Schools: Sloan '26 (S) Stanford '26 (S) Wharton '26 (S) Anderson '26 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 685 Q90 V81 DI81 (Online) Verified score

GPA: 3.2

WE:General Management (Technology)

Schools: Sloan '26 (S) Stanford '26 (S) Wharton '26 (S) Anderson '26 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 685 Q90 V81 DI81 (Online) Verified score

Posts: 84

09 Sep 2025, 08:52

Can some expert dig into the usage of "unless" here? I use A unless B to mean not B-> A in the formal logic space. However, its clear that logic does not work here. I vaguely understand that this could also mean B -> not A(common sense usage). Why should I use this common sense if I got formal logic? Also, how can you tell if the question has this common sense usage such as the question under discussion?

Kudos

Bookmarks

750rest

Joined: 27 Jul 2022

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 47

Concentration: Marketing, Operations

Products:

Posts: 47

07 Jan 2026, 23:21

"if Melinda does well on the LSAT and gets a scholarship, then she can become a lawyer." Kindly check in question instesd of AND , OR is written.

By taking AND your justification is correct but i got stuck due to focusing on OR.

Bunuel

Official Explanation

Kudos

Bookmarks

miag

Verbal Forum Moderator

Joined: 10 Dec 2023

Last visit: 08 Aug 2026

Posts: 397

Location: India

Concentration: Marketing, Sustainability

Schools: Anderson '26 (A) Haas '26 (A) Kellogg '26 (A)

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80 Verified score

GPA: 3.2/4

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Schools: Anderson '26 (A) Haas '26 (A) Kellogg '26 (A)

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80 Verified score

Posts: 397

Updated on: 08 Jan 2026, 19:58

Originally posted by miag on 08 Jan 2026, 19:58.
Last edited by miag on 08 Jan 2026, 19:58, edited 1 time in total.

Hi,

I understand where you are coming from but the language is actually correct. I believe its the interpretation part you might be getting confused in!
The question basically states that Melinda can become a lawyer as long as:
- she doesn't do poorly on LSAT
- she doesn't get a scholarship

=> This basically implies that both these need to be not true for her to be a lawyer.

D) follows from this line of reasoning. Hope this helps!

750rest