vinayakdl wrote:

samirnajeeb wrote:whats wrong with B ... i wouldnt pick B .. but still i want to know what is wrong with it.

isn't "unless there will be" in different tense than the original sentence (sounds more future tense)?

Vinayak

lunarpower wrote:

camitava wrote:

dextar wrote:17. A patient accusing a doctor of malpractice will find it difficult to prove damage if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify about proper medical procedures.
(A) if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify
(B) unless there will be another doctor to testify
(C) without another doctor�s testimony
(D) should there be no testimony from some other doctor
(E) lacking another doctor to testify


Here is there any problem with the senternce formation of option D?

Dextar, in GMAT, they generally look for a simple and the best solution. If u think in that way, option - C suits the best. Now with D, is it not too much wordy and I think, this is also changing the meaning of the sentence. Above all, it is not making any sense at all! Am I clear to u, Dextar?

you are correct about which choices are right and wrong.

however, the issue between choices c and d is one of pure wordiness. c is concise and clear, whereas d is extremely wordy and a bit opaque (although it doesn't change the meaning of the sentence).

--

i do have one big problem with this question, though: it relies on changing the original meaning of the sentence. the original meaning - which was not nonsense that had to be changed - involved a lack of doctors, while the correct answer choice involves a lack of testimony. importantly, the gmat doesn't really do this: it usually requires you to stick to the meaning of the original sentence, unless that meaning happens to be self-contradictory, ambiguous, or nonsensical (none of which is the case in choice a here).

Domnu wrote:Choice B is incorrect since the future tense isn't to be used here.

dextar wrote:17. A patient accusing a doctor of malpractice will find it difficult to prove damage if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify about proper medical procedures.
(A) if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify
(B) unless there will be another doctor to testify
(C) without another doctor�s testimony
(D) should there be no testimony from some other doctor
(E) lacking another doctor to testify


Here is there any problem with the senternce formation of option D?

GMATGuruNY wrote:

dextar wrote:17. A patient accusing a doctor of malpractice will find it difficult to prove damage if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify about proper medical procedures.
(A) if there is a lack of some other doctor to testify
(B) unless there will be another doctor to testify
(C) without another doctor�s testimony
(D) should there be no testimony from some other doctor
(E) lacking another doctor to testify


Here is there any problem with the senternce formation of option D?

I received a PM asking me to discuss the conditional statements in the SC above.

Avoid any answer choice that uses the future tense within an if clause or an unless clause.

Eliminate B.

Eliminate D because the inclusion of should implies doubt and changes the meaning: should you win the lottery tomorrow implies that I don't expect you to win the lottery tomorrow.

In E, it's unclear what is being modified by the word lacking. Eliminate E.

Between A and C, C is more concise. Eliminate A.

The correct answer is C.

Eliminate D because the inclusion of should implies doubt and changes the meaning: should you win the lottery tomorrow implies that I don't expect you to win the lottery tomorrow.