When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed at the prevention of a

Question

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients.

(A) at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients

Wordy choice that features two prepositions -- 'of a catastrophic illness' and 'from financially destroying elderly patients'. Other choices are better.

(B) at being a preventive against catastrophic illness financially destroying elderly patients

'being a preventive' is incorrect

(C) at preventing a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient

Looks good -- keep.

(D) to prevent a catastrophic illness financially destroying an elderly patient

A catastrophic illness doesn't do the act of financially destroying an elderly patient -- we need 'from' after prevent. 'Aimed to' is also the incorrect idiom -- should be 'aimed at'

(E) to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness

'Aimed to' is also the incorrect idiom -- should be 'aimed at'.

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

The phrase "aim at" seems to have two possible functions. One is to aim the way we'd focus a gun on a target. In this case, we'd want a noun to come after the phrase. For example:

Tim aimed the Super Soaker at  his toddler's head , greatly displeasing the toddler's grandparents.

The target here is the "toddler's head," a simple noun phrase.

The other way "aim at" can be used is to convey the sense of attempting to achieve a goal. In this case, the phrase is often followed by an -ing action:

Most of Tim's therapy has been aimed at  making  him less cruel and vengeful towards his children.

Now the therapy has an objective: making Tim less cruel. 
 
Notice that, in (A) "aim at" is followed by the noun "prevention," and in (C) "aim at" is followed by the -ing form, "preventing. So the real question here is which usage makes more sense: are we focusing a projectile on a target, in which case, we'd prefer the noun? Or are we trying to achieve a goal, in which case, we'd want the -ing?

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to claim that someone is launching Medicare at a target the way one might shoot an arrow. Rather, it's more logical to write that Medicare is attempting to achieve a goal, so it's the second usage that's appropriate, and we want to follow "aim at" with an -ing that captures the goal. This is what we have in (C).

I hope that helps!

MikeScarn · Answer

Really tough question! "aimed at the prevention of x from destroying y" is awkward and difficult to understand. "aimed at being a preventative" is incorrect. The use of the article 'a' indicates that a noun is coming. "preventative" can be used as an adjective or a noun. If we were to use "preventative" as a noun, I believe "preventative against" is idiomatically incorrect. I believe we would need "preventative for." I'm certainly open to feedback on this one. The OE just eliminated this option because of 'wordiness'...

I see no problems here The tricky part is the singular noun ' the elderly patient .' I could see how many folks would think *That doesn't make any sense! Medicare wasn't enacted for a single elderly patient!* I hear you, but this is another strange style/usage thing that we use in everyday speech. I'll write a few examples below: "Growing up in a lower class household, Mike votes for city officials that advocate for the poor man." "Mike began his Duke basketball fan-hood by watching players like JJ Redick, who in his thirteenth season in the NBA, has always been relatively unathletic compared to his peers. JJ is an inspiration to the kid who can't jump very high or move very quickly." 1. We do not need the infinitive "to prevent" after the simple past tense 'aimed'. Verb Tense Error 2. We are missing the word 'from' in-between 'illness' and 'financially'. Verb Tense Error and Meaning Error Think about it. When medicare was enacted in 1965 ( the past ), it was aimed to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed. This is missing the word 'from' before 'being.' Medicare wasn't aimed to prevent elderly patients that are financially destroyed . It was aimed to prevent elderly patients from getting financially destroyed. Bonus Content

If I were to write this sentence, I would do it as so: Wouldn't that be easier

daagh · Answer

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed  at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients.

(A) at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients
(B) at being a preventive against catastrophic illness financially destroying elderly patients
(C) at preventing a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient
(D) to prevent a catastrophic illness financially destroying an elderly patient
(E) to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness

The entry into the topic is through the split between the singular patient and the plural patients. Nobody will enact a law for the sake of a single patient or the patient. Therefore, let's drop C and D.

In B and E, the use of the word 'being' used as modifier renders them wrong.

Particularly the use of 'to prevent' will be redundant in D and E because, we already have 'aimed at" as a purpose marker.

A remains as the correct choice.

Particularly the use of 'to prevent' will be redundant in D and E because, we already have 'aimed at" as a purpose marker.

gmatt1476 · Answer

Official Explanation

Verb Form; Diction

Two issues can be identified here: first, we must determine what form follows the phrase it was aimed, used to describe a goal or intended purpose; second, we must determine what preposition (if any) connects prevent or its cognates with the thing that is actually prevented.

A. This choice uses the idiomatically correct was aimed at. However, the word prevention incorrectly takes both the preposition of and the preposition from; this makes the sentence awkward and ambiguous. Furthermore, using the noun prevention makes the sentence wordier than choices using some form of the verb to prevent.

B. This choice uses the idiomatically correct was aimed at. However, using the noun a preventative makes the sentence wordier than cases using some form of the verb to prevent.

C. Correct. The phrase at preventing is correct in context: it describes Medicare's intended purpose. Furthermore, the preposition from correctly indicates a consequence that has been prevented.

D. This choice uses the idiomatically incorrect was aimed to. Furthermore, it fails to use the idiomatically correct prevent from.

E. This choice uses the idiomatically incorrect was aimed to. Furthermore, it fails to use the idiomatically correct prevent from.

The correct answer is C.

shaonkarim · Answer

Please Experts,suggest me from where should I learn idioms that are frequently tested in GMAT ? Thanks ☺

Posted from my mobile device

DealMakerOne · Answer

Hi shaonkarim Three things come to my mind: 1) a very concise list of "the most common idioms" by Magoosh: https://magoosh.resources.s3.amazonaws.c ... Idioms.pdf 2) a great guide by GMATNinja who, in some way, busts myths to learn all 25,000 idioms: https://gmatclub.com/forum/experts-topi ... 41848.html 3) another one, very reputable ManhattanPrep Sentence Correction Guide (they have a special section for Idioms and Odd/Ends)

LIBERTYRodP · Answer

IDIOMS

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed  at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients .

(A) at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients   ---- "prevention of X from Y" is an incorrect idiom. The correct idiom is "to prevent X from Y". Therefore, the idiom requires the verboid form of "prevent". It can't be set with the noun.  
(B) at being a preventive against catastrophic illness financially destroying elderly patients  ---- "being a preventive" is extremely wordy.  
(C) at preventing a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient   ----- CORRECT 
(D) to prevent a catastrophic illness financially destroying an elderly patient   ---- the correct idiom should be "aiming at" 
(E) to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness  ----- the correct idiom should be "aiming at"

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Choice A:  Option A incorrectly uses the noun form of "preventing", "prevention”; the correct form of the idiom "aimed at" requires it to be followed by a verb in the "verb+ing" form. Thus, Option A is incorrect.

Choice B:  Option B is needlessly wordy, due to its use of the word "being". Thus, Option B is not a good answer choice.

Choice C:  Option C is quite concise and maintains the correct use of idioms throughout the sentence. Thus, C is correct.

Choice D:  In Option D, we see the use of the unidiomatic phrase "aimed to". Thus, Option D is incorrect.

Choice E:  Option E utilizes the same unidiomatic phrase that Option D does. Thus, Option E is incorrect.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of “Use of ‘Being’ on GMAT”, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2w9FNmjwtw

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

dadele · Answer

GMATNinja  could you please help us choose between option A and C.

GMATIntensive · Answer

Sentence Analysis

https://www.thegmatco.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/22.png

The sentence provides the original aim of Medicare. The sentence seems to say that the aim was to prevent a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients.

The sentence has the following problems:

1. As is, the sentence means that the law, Medicare, was aimed at preventing a catastrophic illness – this doesn’t make much sense. How can a law prevent people from suffering catastrophic illnesses?
2. The modification of “prevention” by “from financially destroying elderly patients” doesn’t make sense since “prevention from financially destroying patients” doesn’t make sense.

Option Analysis

A.  at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients  
 Incorrect . For the reasons mentioned above.

B.  at being a preventive against catastrophic illness financially destroying elderly patients 
 Incorrect . For the following reasons:

1. The phrase “aimed at being a preventive against illness” is sufficiently awkward. For example, we don’t say “This protest is aimed at being a demonstrator for the injustice”; we say “This protest is aimed at demonstrating the injustice”.
2. In this option, “financially destroying elderly patients” is a verb-ing modifier for the “illness”. Thus, the option means that the law was aimed at preventing some kind of illness. What kind of illnesses? The kind of illnesses that are financially destroying elderly patients. Neither of these aspects – the law aiming at preventing illnesses, and preventing illnesses that are currently financially destroying elderly patients – makes sense.

C.  at preventing a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient  
 Correct . This option says that the law was aimed at preventing x from doing y i.e. the aim was that x should not be able to do y. In other words, the aim was that a catastrophic illness should not be able to financially destroy elderly patients. That makes a lot of sense. Financial aid could be provided to elderly people who are suffering from a catastrophic illness so that they don’t get financially destroyed.

D.  to prevent a catastrophic illness financially destroying an elderly patient  
 Incorrect . This option has the second error of option B.

E.  to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness 
 Incorrect . This option says that the law is trying to prevent elderly patients! Doesn’t make sense. Also, “being financially destroyed” is a verb-ing modifier for “patients”, meaning that we are talking about patients that are currently being destroyed by a catastrophic illness. Again, doesn’t make sense.

Please note that while the official explanation says that “aimed to” is incorrect, this use is quite common in credible publications such as WSJ.com and Nytimes.com. Thus, we do not consider this construction incorrect.

GMATNinja · Answer

I think you're on the right track regarding (E). In (E), it sounds like Medicare was enacted to prevent elderly patients themselves -- as if there was a group of "elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness" and Medicare's goal was to "prevent" that group. Um... prevent them from  doing  something? Prevent the group from  existing ?

The logical meaning is more clear in (C): What was Medicare aimed at preventing? The financial destruction OF the elderly patient BY a catastrophic illness.

Here's an explanation  of (A) vs (C) that doesn't depend on the alleged VAN rule.

Hmm... not sure I follow. Can you elaborate? The main subject-verb pair in the clause ("it was aimed") is identical in all five answer choices, so I'm not sure that passive vs. active could be an issue here at all. But let us know if you're thinking of something different.

JonShukhrat · Answer

Dear  IanStewart

What bewilders me in C is “ the  elderly patient”.
“the” seems to talk about one exact elderly patient, doesn’t it? While reading C, I was wondering how an entire Medicare can be enacted for one person? As it is, the correct choice is adopted from  The New York Times . I browsed it but still have no clue. I would much appreciate if you could elucidate.

Many thanks in advance.

IanStewart · Answer

It's actually the opposite that can be true - using "a" instead of "the" can suggest you're talking about one specific thing. if you take this sentence: The snow leopard is threatened by climate change. we're using "the" to refer to the category of "snow leopard". Here we could also use the plural, "Snow leopards are threatened by climate change", but we could not use an indefinite article without changing the meaning: "A snow leopard is threatened by climate change" would mean there is one snow leopard that is threatened. The sentence would no longer refer to the species or category as a whole. I've never really thought about this use of "the", so perhaps there's a rule someone else might be able to articulate better than I can, but it seems to me any time a sentence could be phrased using a plural ("snow leopards are threatened", or "the bill is meant to prevent illnesses from financially destroying elderly patients"), then if we rephrase the sentence in the singular, "the" will usually be preferable to "a", since by using "the" we are referring to the category rather than to an individual within the category. While saying "an elderly patient" seems fine to me in this question, you could read it to mean "a particular elderly patient", and for that reason, using "the" might be preferable. This usage of "the" is not common, but nor is it altogether rare. Your question immediately reminded me of another official question which uses "the" in the same way (at the beginning, in the non-underlined portion) : https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-the-farm ... 61370.html

GMATNinja · Answer

Ah, I see. Honestly, I can't really come up with a good example either. But I wouldn't conclude that "aim at ___ing" is always wrong in an active construction. The GMAT  loves  to punish us when we try to cling to an ever-growing list of memorized grammar rules. Instead, keep an eye out for this construction, and think really hard about how the wording affects the meaning in each unique example.

That probably isn't too satisfying, but I hope that it helps a little bit!

Basshead · Answer

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed  at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients .

(A) at the prevention of a catastrophic illness from financially destroying elderly patients

Wordy choice that features two prepositions -- 'of a catastrophic illness' and 'from financially destroying elderly patients'. Other choices are better.

(B) at being a preventive against catastrophic illness financially destroying elderly patients

'being a preventive' is incorrect

(C) at preventing a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient

Looks good -- keep.

(D) to prevent a catastrophic illness financially destroying an elderly patient

A catastrophic illness doesn't do the act of financially destroying an elderly patient -- we need 'from' after prevent. 'Aimed to' is also the incorrect idiom -- should be 'aimed at'

(E) to prevent elderly patients being financially destroyed by a catastrophic illness

'Aimed to' is also the incorrect idiom -- should be 'aimed at'.

shanks2020 · Answer

Hi  CJAnish   AndrewN

Can you please how/why is the second prepositional phrase modifying "prevention" and not "illness"?
In general any thumb rule to identify any prepositional phrase modifies which noun? nearest one or elsewhere

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  shanks2020 . I cannot speak for  CJAnish , but I read your query as one stemming from the original sentence. The answer has to do with context and the way the verb  to prevent  is used. There are two main structures for this verb:

1)  prevent  +  object 
Example:  The campaign was meant to prevent  the spread of AIDS .

2)  prevent  +  object  +  from  +  object 
Example:  The campaign was meant to prevent  the uneducated  from  spreading AIDS .

In the original sentence above, we see a sentence that falls into the second pattern, even if the verb in question has been altered to a noun:

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed at  the prevention of   a catastrophic illness  from  financially destroying elderly patients .

That is a simplification, but it illustrates what I have been outlining. When looking to qualify a prepositional phrase, yes, the majority of the time, it will touch the noun it modifies, but you should look to the context of the sentence to see whether it steers you into one interpretation or another. I would not get too caught up on the issue in (A). You could just as easily disfavor the answer choice for its use of three words in  the prevention of  when  preventing  on its own would do.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me.

- Andrew

mSKR · Answer

HI  AndrewN  sir

1. If instead of past tense, the sentence were in present tense, then D' could be correct?
D' When Medicare  is  enacted  in 1965 , it is aimed  to  prevent ing  a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient
D'' When Medicare  is  enacted  in 1965 , it aims  to  prevent ing  a catastrophic illness from financially destroying the elderly patient
D''' When Medicare  is  enacted  in 1965 , it aims  to  prevent ing  a catastrophic illness   from   financially destroying the elderly patient

I am just trying to identify in what situation  aim to   and  prevent  from   would be correct. 
I know you don't like to reject on the basis of idioms, Could you please share your take on rejecting D and on new versions of D.

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  mSKR . In general, I also shy away from reinterpreting sentences and creating spin-offs, since the five options are carefully prepared by the folks at GMAC™ to allow us to identify particular errors, and analyzing an altered sentence may lead to wayward conclusions or generalizations. Still, I will say that  it is aimed  to   is incorrect usage. You could write,  it is  aiming  to , but the first altered sentence you have written above would remain incorrect. A larger issue, one that affects all three sentences equally, is that if you shift the verb tense to the present, the dependent clause now seems to project into the future, as though Medicare has not been enacted already. Thus, we would expect something across the comma more along the lines of  it  will  aim to prevent . I would not spend too much more effort if I were you thinking of how to rewrite an incorrect answer choice. Learn what makes it incorrect and see if you can identify how the correct answer addresses any deficiencies, and you will set yourself up for success if that point is tested again.

I do not mean to be a nay-sayer. I imagine you put a fair amount of effort into crafting the above sentences. However, my goal is to provide sound advice on how to prepare for the GMAT™, and I believe that certain preparation methods are effective while others are not, based on my experience as both a test-taker and a tutor.

Thank you for thinking to ask me.

- Andrew

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed at the prevention of a

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was aimed at the prevention of a

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards