BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

"Numbers of" is always wrong in GMAT

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

"Numbers of" is always wrong in GMAT

by goelmohit2002 » Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:36 pm
Hi All,

Manhattan says that "Numbers of" is always wrong in GMAT. But if we see the below question OG-10, Q152, it seems that this rule does not fit in GMAT land....similar to "being always wrong" in GMAT...

Can someone please tell is "Numbers of" always wrong in GMAT or not ? or this particular question is an exception since numbers of is present in all the options.

When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970's, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an "Andromeda strain," a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.

(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it
(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it
(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them
(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:29 am

by Alexandra S » Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:49 am
I think that the rule you mentioned works when you have to choose between "numbers of" and sth else as this expression is rarely used.
As for this question, it tests something different.

Is C the right answer?
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:06 am
the rule they talk about is a number of and the number of, so if a/the is there it can never be numbers of but only numbers of could be there as is this case...

C is right choice, it seems, as a microbe is the subject of the subordinate clause starting with that...and then and...compound statement, and them can not refer back to a microbe so D E are out,
A B are out because already a microbe is subject of both sentence it is not necessary to replicate ..

my 2 cents,,,
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Jun 20, 2009 1:54 pm
Alexandra S wrote:I think that the rule you mentioned works when you have to choose between "numbers of" and sth else as this expression is rarely used.
As for this question, it tests something different.

Is C the right answer?
Yes OA is "C"
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Jun 20, 2009 2:00 pm
maihuna wrote:the rule they talk about is a number of and the number of, so if a/the is there it can never be numbers of but only numbers of could be there as is this case...

C is right choice, it seems, as a microbe is the subject of the subordinate clause starting with that...and then and...compound statement, and them can not refer back to a microbe so D E are out,
A B are out because already a microbe is subject of both sentence it is not necessary to replicate ..

my 2 cents,,,
There are three rules in Manhattan regarding "number(s) of"
1. Numbers of = Always incorrect.
2. a number of = always plural.
3. The number of = singular.

But can someone please help me understand which one is better sentence:

1. A vast "numbers" of humans will be killed
2. A vast "number" of humans will be killed.

I also checked OG-10...there are quite a large number of places where OG uses numbers of...although they were not the part of underlined part of sentence....

Please help.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Wed Jun 24, 2009 10:47 am
Experts kindly share your opinion.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 3:55 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:740

by Domnu » Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:38 pm
It would be

A vast number of humans will be killed.

This is because 'a' points out the singularity. However, this sentence is also valid:

Vast numbers of humans will be killed.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:42 pm
Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of".... :-(

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 3:55 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:740

by Domnu » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:43 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of".... :-(

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?
Actually, I don't think it's ever a good idea to kick out a sentence just because a certain phrase is present. The English language has more than its fair share of quirks, and there are bound to be certain exceptions.

I'm in a bit of a hurry, so I'll answer your second question a bit later.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:22 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of".... :-(

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?
Goel,
WHy you want explanation for some manhattan tricks? they have made certain rules like that, and they all are situational, I do not think numbers of is wrong sort of think,

pm stacey, she should clarify...
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:48 am
maihuna wrote:
goelmohit2002 wrote:Thanks.

Then what to be done for "numbers of".... :-(

Manhattan says kick it out immediately....but looks like it is correct....

Or there are some specific patters where "numbers of" is correct. If yes then can you please elaborate on those patterns ?
Goel,
WHy you want explanation for some manhattan tricks? they have made certain rules like that, and they all are situational, I do not think numbers of is wrong sort of think,

pm stacey, she should clarify...
Thanks Maihuna...I will pm to Stacey...

Please note that Manhattan in their S-V and idiom list clearly says that numbers of is wrong....

I am not sure about the new edition of Manhattan but the book that I am using says so....
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Thu Jul 02, 2009 11:40 am
Hey guys

So, technically "THE numbers of" or "A numbers of" is wrong - that whole thing, including the article in front, not just "numbers of." You can have "numbers of" without those articles, as in the example at the top of the thread.

(You can also, technically, have "the numbers of" if you are literally talking about multiple numbers - eg, two players have the numbers 7 and 13 on their jerseys, and I say "the numbers of the jerseys are 7 and 13." But that kind of set-up would be very unusual on this test.)

Also, remember that there's almost always an obscure exception to any rule you can think of. Annoying, but true. ("Being" is not always wrong either - it's just almost always wrong on the GMAT.) Because of the frequent, obscure exceptions, we should mostly just worry about the most likely / primary rules. Otherwise, we'll drive ourselves crazy. :)
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:06 pm
Thanks Stacey.

Can you please look into the following post...there it seems the correct answer is D...

but it contains "the highest numbers of"

Does intrusion of highest between numbers and the...makes it correct here...

https://www.beatthegmat.com/numbers-of-f ... tml#164390
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1